The trouble with religion is that it acts like a magnifying glass. When people are in harmony with God and with one another ,religion becomes a beautiful gift. God is glorified and and all is magnificient. This is rare though. So rare that it is hard to think of a time in history when a people who applied the laws of God to themselves as a nation were upheld as a model to aspire to. Even the Old Testament epic of a people who followed God through the desert and established themselves in the Promised land failed to impress. There was corruption, there was consistent and deliberate rebellion - in short religious laws did nothing to make people into a better nation.
The pattern conintues throughout the Middle Ages. under the power of the Christian church we had the Inquisition, the fanatical Crusades and thousands of people were tortured to death in the name of Christ - all sanctioned by the laws of state which applied the rule of God. never again should we let the church be the ruling power of any nation.
Then there is the Islamic sharia' law. Admittedly there has been periods of history where Islamic law held vast empires together and culture and education flourished. What happened? There is a recent call for Sharia law to be applied in Kuwait. I asked a Kuwaiti friend recently what he thought. He admitted that there is no contemporary society in the world today who offer a positive model of Islamic law. Instead we think of Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan under the Taleban and Pakistan. None of them inspire us as fair and free societies. What on earth makes Kuwait thinks she can do any better? History would suggest otherwise.
As a Christian I think we are called to be good citizens by being salt and light. This means being engaged in our society and seeking to serve all humanity. Our religious beliefs and convictions should impact the public domain in a positive way. The minute though we have a group of people who starts to impose God's will in the form of codified laws we are in trouble. Of course the law should reflect the compassion and justice of God - but this is best achieved through God working through the lives of individuals and transforming them into his likeness through loving relationship. This is when religion comes at its best. Unsolicited grace and mercy manifested though a desire to do the right thing rather than because we are legally obliged to do so. May God write his laws on our hearts.
What do you think? Will Sharia Law make Kuwait a better place?
Sunday, 23 November 2008
Saturday, 4 October 2008
Fundamentalism in Kuwait
The Australian Embassy security warning to the GCC states of a serious and credible terrorist threat is raising the spectra of religion gone badly wrong . . . again!
Fundamentalism is getting a bad name! The term fundamentalism was originally used as a label to describe Christians in the American Bible Belt who reacted to the perceived threat of liberalism in the Church by producing a series of tracts calling for a return to the fundamentals of the Christian faith. The fundamentals for this group was an unswerving faith in the Bible as the Word of God and the historical veracity of a crucified and risen Christ. In this sense then, I am happy to describe myself as a fundamentalist Christian. People are not comfortable with that label though. Fundamentalism has become a term which is used to describe religious fanatics. Instead of fundamentalist I would prefer the use of the word extremist to describe someone whose religious views has polarized the world into ‘them and us’. The rise of religious extremism is an alarming and unexpected feature of our contemporary world and it affects every faith community. It is expressed through the bombing of abortion clinics in the USA, the recent persecution of Christians in India by Hindus and terrorism in Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan and beyond.
So what are the features of religious extremism and when does someone cross the line from being a fundamentalist to something more ominous? The following is a simple and helpful guide. Scholars identify the following trends. Extremism often starts as a reaction to a perceived threat within their own faith community. Often the worse form of hostility is manifest between different sects who bear almost identical convictions. Church history for example, is peppered with brutal confrontation between Catholics and Protestants.
Secondly, extremism justifies the use of violence as a means to an end. The end is usually the desire to forcibly impose their version of truth upon others.
Finally extremism emphasizes a dogmatic and exclusivist theology which polarizes and dehumanizes others of different convictions.
The wide scale suffering caused by religious extremism is causing some to see all religion as the problem. The atheists argue that religion simply has to go (we won’t mention Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and Hitler who have massacred millions out of their atheist convictions).
Instead I believe a solution is a return to the fundamentals. Essentially a fundamentalist is someone who believes in the fundamentals of their faith. The scriptures insist on a compassionate theology. You cannot have ‘Love your neighbour’ and ‘burn heretic burn’ as compatible convictions. Fundamentalism should in fact provoke us to take a firm stand on such issues as poverty and exploitation and heighten our commitment to campaign for a better world.
So what are the features of religious extremism and when does someone cross the line from being a fundamentalist to something more ominous? The following is a simple and helpful guide. Scholars identify the following trends. Extremism often starts as a reaction to a perceived threat within their own faith community. Often the worse form of hostility is manifest between different sects who bear almost identical convictions. Church history for example, is peppered with brutal confrontation between Catholics and Protestants.
Secondly, extremism justifies the use of violence as a means to an end. The end is usually the desire to forcibly impose their version of truth upon others.
Finally extremism emphasizes a dogmatic and exclusivist theology which polarizes and dehumanizes others of different convictions.
The wide scale suffering caused by religious extremism is causing some to see all religion as the problem. The atheists argue that religion simply has to go (we won’t mention Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and Hitler who have massacred millions out of their atheist convictions).
Instead I believe a solution is a return to the fundamentals. Essentially a fundamentalist is someone who believes in the fundamentals of their faith. The scriptures insist on a compassionate theology. You cannot have ‘Love your neighbour’ and ‘burn heretic burn’ as compatible convictions. Fundamentalism should in fact provoke us to take a firm stand on such issues as poverty and exploitation and heighten our commitment to campaign for a better world.
(Islam is not unique to being portrayed as a religion with a sword. The picture at the top comes from a church window in Kuwait. It is a picture of St Paul wielding one mighty big sword!)
Tuesday, 30 September 2008
St Paul's Church says Eid Mubarak!
Eid al Fitr is the feast of the breaking of fast. After a tough month of Ramadan where devout Muslims endure hot weather without any food or drink in the daytime there is ample cause for celebration
The discipline required to succeed in this fast is formidable and I admire those who can meet the rigours of Ramadan, especially in this kind of heat. An earlier post received by one of my readers lamented the wide scale hypocrisy by those who say they are observing the fast when in fact they are not. Surely though God sees and knows the intents of our hearts and there is no deceiving Him with our actions.
This raises for me the challenge of prescribing a religious practice and imposing it on all society. Kuwait is in fact one of the few countries in the world where ramadan has such an overwhelming impact on public life. Expatriates and visitors are quite startled by the realisation that literally all the restuarants and hotels are closed in the daytime. The result is a split society. The obvious split is between those who have to eat and drink in secret because they are not of the Islamic faith and those who are fasting out of conviction. Yet, there are those Muslims who are not fasting simply because they do not want to - and they resent having to be hypocritical, ie; pretending to fast in order to keep face with family and society.
Is there a law in Kuwait that punishes non-fasting Muslims? Surely God would prefer a straight forward honest "I am not fasting this year" posture rather than a deceitful pretence. Is hypocrisy rewarded? No religion is exempt from hypocrisy and the Church has its fair share too.
Jesus said that when you fast you should not let anyone see and that those who show off that they are fasting will get their reward in full! In other words they will get the admiration and respect from their fellow humans but God is not fooled.
Whatever you think and whoever you are, I send you greetings in the name of God almighty, the merciful and compassionate and I pray that Eid will be a time of blessing.
The discipline required to succeed in this fast is formidable and I admire those who can meet the rigours of Ramadan, especially in this kind of heat. An earlier post received by one of my readers lamented the wide scale hypocrisy by those who say they are observing the fast when in fact they are not. Surely though God sees and knows the intents of our hearts and there is no deceiving Him with our actions.
This raises for me the challenge of prescribing a religious practice and imposing it on all society. Kuwait is in fact one of the few countries in the world where ramadan has such an overwhelming impact on public life. Expatriates and visitors are quite startled by the realisation that literally all the restuarants and hotels are closed in the daytime. The result is a split society. The obvious split is between those who have to eat and drink in secret because they are not of the Islamic faith and those who are fasting out of conviction. Yet, there are those Muslims who are not fasting simply because they do not want to - and they resent having to be hypocritical, ie; pretending to fast in order to keep face with family and society.
Is there a law in Kuwait that punishes non-fasting Muslims? Surely God would prefer a straight forward honest "I am not fasting this year" posture rather than a deceitful pretence. Is hypocrisy rewarded? No religion is exempt from hypocrisy and the Church has its fair share too.
Jesus said that when you fast you should not let anyone see and that those who show off that they are fasting will get their reward in full! In other words they will get the admiration and respect from their fellow humans but God is not fooled.
Whatever you think and whoever you are, I send you greetings in the name of God almighty, the merciful and compassionate and I pray that Eid will be a time of blessing.
Sunday, 21 September 2008
Does God love the homosexual?
The Arab Times reported lately that Shaikha Fariha was launching a campaign to help clean up the rampant homosexual scene in Kuwait. This was news to me! Is there really rampant homosexuality among Kuwaiti youths? What is the Islamic view of homosexuality and how do they suggest it be 'cleaned up?'
There has been a lot controversy lately in the Anglican church over the issue of gay people and their role in the church. The overall consensus in the world-wide church seems to be that gay marriage is not allowed under divine law and that a homosexual in an active sexual relationship (implying that a celibate homosexual can be in leadership) should not be in a leadership role. That being said the church also affirms that God loves all his creation and that Christ came and revealed God's love to all human kind by dying on the cross.
So it is clear to me that Christ died for all sinners including gays and lesbians and that they have access to God's love through the works of Christ. Then what?
Those who are called to leadership are expected to live up to high standards of character in terms of what they say and what they do. It is unacceptable for a heterosexual Christian leader to be having sexual relations outside the context of marriage (which is defined in the Bible as life-long loving union between one man and one woman.)
Clearly this definition of marriage excludes gays. The only option for a Christian gay (a leader or not) is to be celibate. This latter view is being challenged though on a number of grounds. The debate rages on in the church. Unfortunately this debate has been sidelined by hysteria and simply nasty homophobic attitudes which is deplorable and not Christ-like at all.
Whateve the outcome of this debate, it needs to be said that all Christians (whether gay or straight) are called to live a life of holiness and seek to emulate Christ. However as all of us are flawed in one way or the other we recognise that this is a life long process and that we all need to continually depend on God's grace and mercy.
There has been a lot controversy lately in the Anglican church over the issue of gay people and their role in the church. The overall consensus in the world-wide church seems to be that gay marriage is not allowed under divine law and that a homosexual in an active sexual relationship (implying that a celibate homosexual can be in leadership) should not be in a leadership role. That being said the church also affirms that God loves all his creation and that Christ came and revealed God's love to all human kind by dying on the cross.
So it is clear to me that Christ died for all sinners including gays and lesbians and that they have access to God's love through the works of Christ. Then what?
Those who are called to leadership are expected to live up to high standards of character in terms of what they say and what they do. It is unacceptable for a heterosexual Christian leader to be having sexual relations outside the context of marriage (which is defined in the Bible as life-long loving union between one man and one woman.)
Clearly this definition of marriage excludes gays. The only option for a Christian gay (a leader or not) is to be celibate. This latter view is being challenged though on a number of grounds. The debate rages on in the church. Unfortunately this debate has been sidelined by hysteria and simply nasty homophobic attitudes which is deplorable and not Christ-like at all.
Whateve the outcome of this debate, it needs to be said that all Christians (whether gay or straight) are called to live a life of holiness and seek to emulate Christ. However as all of us are flawed in one way or the other we recognise that this is a life long process and that we all need to continually depend on God's grace and mercy.
Monday, 8 September 2008
A God Shaped Hole
I always feel more spiritually alive when I come to Kuwait. During the month of Ramadan I am especially reminded of how important God is to so many people. It is quite a contrast to the UK where there is such a glut of materialism and secularism it dulls the spiritual senses. On this visit to the UK I was struck by the high profile of atheism in the media. Spearheaded by popular scientist Richard Dawkins through his books and television appearances, atheism seems to be making an appeal to those who have lost sight of God in the West. I took time out to read Dawkins latest book The God Delusion.
This book promised scientific evidence that there was no God. Dawkins takes the controversial stand that all theists are indoctrinated in their religion from childhood and as a result need to be freed from their irrational and unscientific beliefs. Atheism is offered as the liberating truth available to all those who are willing to climb to the higher levels of intellectual achievement. He implies that those who profess belief in God are irrational and stupid and those who are atheists are enlightened and intellectually superior.
Dawkins in his admirably accessible and eminently readable book walks us through a variety of arguments against the existence of God. He surveys briefly some of the philosophical history, dabbles in some theological conundrums and then finally gets to the chapter which he promises will demolish the God delusion once and for all. With bated breath I turned the pages.
What I found was not science or even a deep philosophical conundrum. He raises the question that every six year old asks at one time or another. In a nutshell the irrefutable scientific proof he offers is this “If God created the world – then who created God?” The existence of a supernatural intelligence who predates material matter must have come from somewhere and is therefore problematic for science.
The God Delusion left me puzzled. Why does Dawkins insist that religion and science are incompatible? How does he cope with scientists who come to faith in God in their adulthood as a result of their scientific enquiries? Does everything in the universe that exists have to be material? How can science answer questions of a spiritual nature? Why do the discoveries of the DNA Genetic code, the unique anthropocentric nature of our world, the irreducible complexities of so many biological organisms not persuade Dawkins that this may be indicative of intelligent design?
The answer is simple. Dawkins has chosen to interpret the world around him through the filter of his atheist paradigm. He is doing the very thing that scientists are not supposed to do. The evidence is supposed to lead to a conclusion, rather than a conclusion interpreting the evidence.
One reason why I believe in God (though not scientific it is an observable phenomenon) is through witnessing the yearning across humanity to connect with the numinous. The early church bishop, Augustine also observed this spiritual dynamic in people and he suggested that all humans seem to have a God shaped hole in them which makes them restless until it is filled with presence of God. I see evidence of this yearning for God especially during Ramadan.
One of the most awesome sights I have ever witnessed in Kuwait is being a guest at the Grand Mosque during the Night of Power towards the end of Ramadan. Thousands and thousands of people turn up to prayer in an atmosphere which can only be described as electric. There is a raw expectation that on this night they were going to have an encounter with God. There is a palpable ache in the crowds to commune with their God and it left an indelible impression upon me.
Where does this spiritual hunger come from? It points me to the creator of the world who left his imprint in us. Our deep desire to experience a spiritual reality is nothing less than a natural human instinct to reconnect to our origin and source of life – God.
To my Muslim friends in Kuwait, I pray that this Ramadan will be a time of blessing and a time when that God-shaped hole will be filled by the presence of the Spirit of God.
The scriptures say “Then you will call upon me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you. You will seek me and find me when you seek with all your heart” Jeremiah 29:12,13.
This book promised scientific evidence that there was no God. Dawkins takes the controversial stand that all theists are indoctrinated in their religion from childhood and as a result need to be freed from their irrational and unscientific beliefs. Atheism is offered as the liberating truth available to all those who are willing to climb to the higher levels of intellectual achievement. He implies that those who profess belief in God are irrational and stupid and those who are atheists are enlightened and intellectually superior.
Dawkins in his admirably accessible and eminently readable book walks us through a variety of arguments against the existence of God. He surveys briefly some of the philosophical history, dabbles in some theological conundrums and then finally gets to the chapter which he promises will demolish the God delusion once and for all. With bated breath I turned the pages.
What I found was not science or even a deep philosophical conundrum. He raises the question that every six year old asks at one time or another. In a nutshell the irrefutable scientific proof he offers is this “If God created the world – then who created God?” The existence of a supernatural intelligence who predates material matter must have come from somewhere and is therefore problematic for science.
The God Delusion left me puzzled. Why does Dawkins insist that religion and science are incompatible? How does he cope with scientists who come to faith in God in their adulthood as a result of their scientific enquiries? Does everything in the universe that exists have to be material? How can science answer questions of a spiritual nature? Why do the discoveries of the DNA Genetic code, the unique anthropocentric nature of our world, the irreducible complexities of so many biological organisms not persuade Dawkins that this may be indicative of intelligent design?
The answer is simple. Dawkins has chosen to interpret the world around him through the filter of his atheist paradigm. He is doing the very thing that scientists are not supposed to do. The evidence is supposed to lead to a conclusion, rather than a conclusion interpreting the evidence.
One reason why I believe in God (though not scientific it is an observable phenomenon) is through witnessing the yearning across humanity to connect with the numinous. The early church bishop, Augustine also observed this spiritual dynamic in people and he suggested that all humans seem to have a God shaped hole in them which makes them restless until it is filled with presence of God. I see evidence of this yearning for God especially during Ramadan.
One of the most awesome sights I have ever witnessed in Kuwait is being a guest at the Grand Mosque during the Night of Power towards the end of Ramadan. Thousands and thousands of people turn up to prayer in an atmosphere which can only be described as electric. There is a raw expectation that on this night they were going to have an encounter with God. There is a palpable ache in the crowds to commune with their God and it left an indelible impression upon me.
Where does this spiritual hunger come from? It points me to the creator of the world who left his imprint in us. Our deep desire to experience a spiritual reality is nothing less than a natural human instinct to reconnect to our origin and source of life – God.
To my Muslim friends in Kuwait, I pray that this Ramadan will be a time of blessing and a time when that God-shaped hole will be filled by the presence of the Spirit of God.
The scriptures say “Then you will call upon me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you. You will seek me and find me when you seek with all your heart” Jeremiah 29:12,13.
Sunday, 6 July 2008
Muslim-Christian co-belligerence in Kuwait
I really cannot stand the use of the term 'tolerance' to describe good relations between faith communities. For me to be tolerant requires that I do absolutely nothing and simply let the other be. Which is all well if you feel that all God wants you to do.
Equally I do not like the phrase 'co-existence' as that seems awfully like tolerance. Sharing the same space should be a given and faith communities have been co-exsiting in the Middle East for centuries. So what's new?
The reason I do not like these descriptions is because I am an activist. I believe that all Christians are called to be activists and my understanding of Islam is that equally all Muslims are also called to be activist as a result of their faith.
The problem is that activism can be subverted into negative and destructive activity. Rather than acting as a source of cohesion and security - religion can be hijacked by those with wrong thinking and activism to tear society apart. This is a tragedy.
As a Christian I am called to be salt and light in society. I believe all Christians are called to be ambassadors for God and Christ and transform society by opposing evil and championing justice, and by proclaiming Good News. I have been inspired by Muslim activists who seek a fairer and more compassionate society.
Now a new term has entered the world of interfaith relations - co-belligerence.
Belligerence means a stance of aggression and 'co' means to do it together.
This is more like it. Aggressive activism but towards doing what?
I think there are a lot of things in society that Christians and Muslims can campaign aggressively together for.
We can campaign to eradicate poverty and abuse of women. We can work together to end child slavery and human trafficking. We can feed the hungry, minister to the sick and campaign for those who are wrongly imprisoned.
There are some interesting examples from around the world where Christians and Muslims are working together against a common enemy that threatens all humanity. In Indonesia and the Phillipines where there has been suffering caused by natural disasters, Christian and Muslims have shared resources for relief and emergency work.
This does not minimise our differences in theology (eg; the Trinity, salavation by faith in the death and resurrection Christ and so on) but instead it highlights our shared humanity. God is love and all acts of love flows from him as our creator. This is definitely worth exploring and celebrating.
Wonder what we can do in Kuwait together?
Tuesday, 27 May 2008
Do Kuwaitis sing?
It struck me the other day in church when we were singing some hymns of worship to God that as far as I know there is no singing in a mosque meeting. Is this true? Is singing forbidden in Islam or is it simply not part of the worship?
Is there any hadith that talks about music and singing and what do they say?
I would love to know.
From a music lover.
Wednesday, 21 May 2008
Trinity Sunday in Kuwait
Our visiting speaker was Catriona Laing who spoke on the Trinity and also commented briefly on her interfaith work with the Cambridge Interfaith Unit. One of the newer "techniques" in interfaith dialogue she described, was Scripture Reasoning, (see a previous post describing this) and this reminds us of the centrality of the scriptures to our faith and world view.
The Gospel reading was the end of Matthew when Jesus gives the great commission to his followers to "go make and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the father, Son and Holy Spirit."
Catriona talks about the tension these kind of passages cause in an interfaith context. The great commission is a clear command to evangelise the nations, there is a reference to the Trinitarian nature of God and a high Christology which refers to Jesus as the Son of God. The temptation for Christian participants in interfaith encounters is to gloss over or ignore the missionary aspects of the Christian faith altogether. Clearly these latter responses are unsatisfactory and those of other faiths are surprised at how willing Christians are in seeking to appease others by compromising on their own faith.
Miss Laing suggests that the church be faithful in applying faith, reason and tradition in the interfaith arena so that we may be faithful to the Gospel, but also be humble in our interactions.
The Gospel reading was the end of Matthew when Jesus gives the great commission to his followers to "go make and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the father, Son and Holy Spirit."
Catriona talks about the tension these kind of passages cause in an interfaith context. The great commission is a clear command to evangelise the nations, there is a reference to the Trinitarian nature of God and a high Christology which refers to Jesus as the Son of God. The temptation for Christian participants in interfaith encounters is to gloss over or ignore the missionary aspects of the Christian faith altogether. Clearly these latter responses are unsatisfactory and those of other faiths are surprised at how willing Christians are in seeking to appease others by compromising on their own faith.
Miss Laing suggests that the church be faithful in applying faith, reason and tradition in the interfaith arena so that we may be faithful to the Gospel, but also be humble in our interactions.
A Muslim-Christian Conversation
Muslim Blogger
Today’s Bible makes no mention of the father, son and holy spirit as forming a “Trinity”; a term (and idea) coined by the Council of Nicea. Where it not for them, the Christians of today would have gone on believing in them as three seperate beings/entities.
Furthermore, you being a mother, husband and daughter all at the same time is not the same as God forming a trinity, for in the latter case they are considered to be three but of one same essence; three forms of one origin.
You, however, are of one form, with three *roles*. Your analogy does not work. At the same time, you are also someone’s friend, and if you were a woman with loose morals, you could be another man’s mistress. So far, you are: mother, daughter, wife, friend, mistress. That’s five, and why stop there?
Do you see my point? Yet you are still of one form. If we were to simply go with your earlier example, you being only mother, daughter, and wife, you would have to somehow split into three forms to form a “holy trinity” as envisioned by the Council of Nicea.
Further still, is the most crushing proof against this trinity idea: in today’s Bible, Jesus is mentioned as having prayed to the father (I believe before he was taken to be crucified). For the trinity idea to stick, there would have been no need for the “son” to pray *to* the “father” had they have truly been of one origin.
Can you imagine yourself praying to yourself? Or better yet, asking yourself permission to do something?
I invite you to Islaam, where Allaah, the God of all that exists; the God of Jesus, Moses, Abraham, Joseph and Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon them all, and the God of every other Prophet and Messenger that was sent to mankind, asks us not to believe blindly, but to contemplate His signs–those mentioned in His Book–and to reflect on them, understand and believe in them.
Islaam is a religion devoid of confusion and one where you are not asked to believe in one God that is at the same time of a trinity, despite you not understanding, simply because it is a “mystery.” I invite you to the natural religion, the final one revealed by Allaah to all of the creation, so that you may attain the ultimate success.
RevQ8
Thank you for your input. You are quite right in identifying that the word Trinity is not found in the Bible and that the analogy of one form and three roles is limited. In fact any analogy to describe God will be flawed. The task of trying to precisely describe the nature of God in truth eludes us all.
Islam is very attractive in its simplicity and I look with envy at times at the straightforwardness of the shahada, (especially on a Trinity Sunday when I am supposed to enlighten my congregation with knowledge on this difficult and abstract concept.) First of all I want to affirm that Christians believe that God is one. We are not polytheists or tri-theists. There is only one God who has created the hevens and the earth and all that is within. I can say wihout any hesitation the opening Sura of the Qur’an - there is but one God and He is Lord.
The doctrine of Tawhid or unity in Islam is something else which I think we can agree on. God is omnipresent (he is everywhere), omnipotent (all powerful)and omniscient(all knowing). In short God is God - he can do anything and he is beyond our understanding. I have absolutely no doubt that God is able to reveal himself through revelation - whether through the giving of the law, through the sending of prophets and through the giving of His Word.
Islam itself has an interesting debate about the unity of God when it discusses the question is the Quran eternal or created? Clearly if it is eternal then the Quran shares the attributes of God and therefore implies that God in his Unity can speak words and still be of the same essence. Orthodox Islam determined along time ago that this is indeed the case and those who argued that the Quran was created (The Mutazilite school) were consequently rejected as heretics.
So clearly a Word from God cannot be divided from God himself. In the Islamic faith, the Word is given in the form of a book. The Christian faith however believes that God reveals through the scriptures that the Word came as a person - in flesh. We believe that Jesus Christ is the message of God enshrined in human form. A Word who cannot be distinct from its origins. The Qur’an calls Jesus a word from God. Clearly it allows that Jesus spoke the eternal message of God and somehow enshrined in his person the Word. Tawhid suggests to me therefore that God is a unity which is different from saying God is a being of One who cannot be divided. I am one person and yet my oneness consists of a unity of different parts (head, arms, feet etc).
So the doctrine of Trinity is simply saying that God is a unity who reveals himself in substantially real ways. The whole scripture shouts this from Genesis to the end. For example in Genesis 1 God created the world and his Spirit hovered over the waters and he declares in Genesis 2. Let us make mankind in our image.(implying a plurality in his unity) Then we have the OT prophets who see visions of God which hint that He is a complex unity (see Isaiah or Ezekiels descriptions). I could go on but I won’t bore you.
All I want to say that there is sufficient evidence to point to a Trinitarian God. That evidence is found in the Bible and led to the church councils to try and explain the unexplainable!!
Islam calls us to submit to God and I agree that is our only response to God. I have chosen to submit to God and acknowledge that he has revealed himself as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It is a mystery and I am content to let God be God.
Muslim Blogger
Allaah is certainly omnipotent and omniscient, but to say that He is omnipresent is something we Muslims dare not utter. To those who say He is everywhere, we ask: is He in the sewer, the mud or any other undesirable and filthy place? If by “omnipresent” you intend something general in meaning, then this becomes nothing more than playing with words, for it can only explicitly mean what it says it means–that He is literally everywhere.
Rather, we say: He is above the Heavens; high above the creation. He is the Creator, and as such, He cannot be encompassed or held by or within His creation. However, what is “everywhere” is His knowledge, His sight and His hearing: He knows all, sees all, hears all. What He reveals is His will and His word.
To say that He reveals His Self is to fall short of the Truth, and even while He has ascended His Mighty Throne, there is before Him a veil of light. Even the greatest of the Prophets, Muhammad (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa-sallam) was not able to see him.
As for the Qur’aan, it is inaccurate to say the “Word is given in the form of a book.” The Qur’aan is the uncreated speech of Allaah, revealed to the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa-sallam) through the Angel Jibreel. It was not revealed in a book; it was revealed in stages over a period of 23-years. The Qur’aan does not call Jesus “a word from God.” It is understandable that Christians normally misinterpret the verses that speak of this matter when reading the Qur’aan.
Consider this Verse:
{O people of the Scripture! Do not exceed the limits in your religion, nor say of Allâh aught but the truth. The Messiah ‘Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), was (no more than) a Messenger of Allâh and His Word, (”Be!” - and he was) which He bestowed on Maryam (Mary) and a spirit (Rûh) created by Him; so believe in Allâh and His Messengers.} (An-Nisa 4:171)
As you can see, His “Word” is none other than “Be”, or “Kun” in Arabic. This is from the might of Allaah, that He simply says “Be” and it is. So Jesus (’alayhi as-salaam) was brought into existence by His Word (”Be” and is thus a product of His Word. It is therefore also correct to say that he (Jesus) is His Word. Allaah bestowed this Word upon Maryam by speaking it and intending by it the cause to existence of Jesus (’alayhi as-salaam).
The continuation of this beautiful Verse is:
{Say not: “Three (trinity)!” Cease! (it is) better for you. For Allâh is (the only) One Ilâh (God), Glory be to Him (Far Exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allâh is All-Sufficient as a Disposer of affairs.}
You bring up Tawhid. You said: “I am one person and yet my oneness consists of a unity of different parts (head, arms, feet etc). As I mentioned to the owner of this blog, this is not the same as saying God is one and His oneness consists of a father, son and holy spirit. If you were to lose all of your limbs this instant, your oneness would still be preserved, for it is not dependent on the existence of your limbs, but on your self.
If God, as He is understood by the Christians of today, were to make it so that the son and the holy spirit were non-existant, then His trinity would cease to exist, for it is necesarily dependent on those other two beings–unlike your self and your body’s limbs. It is because of this that it is inaccurate to say that God is a “unity”, for this implies that there exists other things with which He is united. What is He a unity of? His creation? Far be He from any and all imperfections.
This is not Tawhid. Allow me to explain it more clearly. Tawhid, as it is known from the Qur’aan and the Sunnah, is“to single out Allaah alone in creating and managing the affairs, to have sincerity of worship towards Him and to abandon worship of others besides him; as well as to affirm His perfect Names and lofty Attributes and to purify Him from any deficiencies or shortcomings.”–Taken from an article written by Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan.
In order to understand it better, we can effectively categorize Tawhid into three parts:
1)Tawhid ar-Ruboobiyyah, 2) Tawhid al-Uloohiyyah, and 3) Tawhid al-Asmaa’ was-Sifaat.
The first can be defined as thus: It is to single out Allaah alone in His actions, with the belief that He is the only Creator of all the creation.
The second: It is what is contained in the Shahaadah: “Laa ilaaha illa Allaah” or “None has the right to be worshipped except Allaah.” Tawhid al-Uloohiyyah is to single out Allaah (alone) in worship by the actions of the slaves (us) which they do in the manner legislated by the Qur’aan and the Sunnah in order to seek nearness to Him, such as supplication, vowing, sacrifice, hope, fear, trust, awe, dread and turning in repentance.
This type of Tawhid was the essence of the call of all the Messengers and Prophets (’alayhumaa as-salaat was-salaam).
Then there is the third type: It is simply to affirm and believe in (as they are) the perfect Names and lofty Attributes of Allaah.
So this is Tawhid.
You later say that there is sufficient evidence in the Bible to make one understand God as being of a trinity. Do you know for certain that you would have believed in this, or even thought of God in this manner, had it not been for the Council’s proclamation of His trinity? I believe it says in the Bible, and I’m paraphrasing, that the father, son and holy spirit are one.
One what?
You might hear one say to a racist: “We [human beings] are all one.” Here he is implying that we are all one (and the same); that there is no *real* difference between us other than the color of our skin. This person is not saying we are all one being, as the trinity suggests about God.
Why do you simply not understand that verse to mean that the father, son and holy spirit are one in terms of the Truth? That what Jesus came with was True, for it was one with what God is–the Truth. The idea of the trinity is essentially the result of first coming up with an idea (the trinity) and then going back to the Bible to find verses that might lead one to thinking it is true.
A pure case of intellectual dishonesty.
I believe I have replied to the bulf of your argument. I will leave you with the words Jesus (’alayhi as-salaam) will utter on the Day of Judgment:
From Soora al-Maa’idah:
117. “Never did I say to them aught except what You (Allaah) did command me to say: ‘Worship Allaah, my Lord and your Lord.’ And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them, but when You took me up, You were the Watcher over them; and You are a witness to all things.
118. “If You punish them, they are Your slaves, and if You forgive them, verily, You, only You are the All-Mighty, the All-Wise.”
RevQ8
I am enjoying our conversation very much indeed. You are clearly someone who thinks through the Word and your faith deeply and I admire that.
I was interested to see that Muslims do not believe that God is omnipresent (all present) but they do believe He is omnipotent (all powerful). You raise the question “Would you find God in the sewers?” I think if God is all powerful then surely this is not beyond his ability. (Whether He would want to or not is another question!)But by saying He would not, are you not then undermining the belief of His omnipotence? Perhaps you are confusing omnipresnece with Pantheism (the belief that God is in everything - ie; a rock or a tree can be worshipped as God) This clearly would be a heresy.
One of my favourite Psalms (Zabiil) is Psalms 139. In this Psalms David cries out “Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? If I go up to the heavens you are there; if I make my bed in the depths you are there. If I rise on the wings of the dawn, if I settgle on the far side of the sea, even there your right hand will guide me . . .” That to me is omnipresence. We can worship God anywhere and God can meet with us - even in the darkest places of the earth. I read plenty of testimonies for example of prisoners discovering the grace and love of God in the depths of prison. God is not shut out of any place in earth. Even in the sewers! I think of the Chinese earthquake, and think of people trapped under the rubble, the gutters and the sewers and I ask myself “If they cried out to God would they find Him?” I think the Scriptural answer is a resounding “Yes!”. For the good book says “Whoever calls on the name of the LORD will be saved”. (Acts 2.21)
This is the real meaning when we say God is omnipresent.
I was also interested to read your comment that the Qur’an does not call Jesus a Word from God. I checked in my English versions and they all translate Sura 3.45 as Jesus being a Word. You mentioned that in Arabic that this word is “Kun” the command that God gives to create (which it is in the verse you quote). But the word in Arabic (3.45) for Jesus being a word is kalimah, which double checking my dictionary unequivocally means word spoken or written.
It is worth noting that the Trinity which the Qur’an refutes is also refuted by Christians. Jesus is asked in the Qur’an if he has taught people to worship him and Mary as separate Gods and the answer is obviously no. The Quranic portrayal of Trinity is God as Father, Mary as Mother and Jesus as the carnal offspring. Along with the Muslims I agree that this is blasphemy and is not part of the teaching of the church.
I defer to your superior knowledge of the Islamic doctrine of Tawhid recognising that my study is not indepth enough to comment.
I can say though that the evidence of Father, Son and Spirit is clear throughout the Bible. Let me quote a very small sample of many similar verses.
Matthew 3.16-17. As soon as Jesus went out of the water, the heavens opened and the Spirit of God descended like a dove. And a voice from heaven said . This is my Son in whom I am well pleased.”
Matthew 28.9. “Go and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
In Mark 1 John the Baptist proclaims Jesus as one who will baptise his followers with the Holy Spirit.He also refers to the voice from heaven calling Jesus His Son.
In John 16 Jesus tell His disciples that he is returning to the Father and that he will send his Holy Spirit. (verse 10 and 13)
2 Corinthians 13.14 “May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.”
Clearly in the New Testament there is abundant evidence referring to Father, Son and Holy Spirit. So to say that there is no reference to them in the Bible is a fallacy. You can check these verses in English, Greek, Arabic and whichever version you choose - they all say the same. It leaves me wondering which version of the Bible you are reading. I know that the New World translation which is the Jehovah Witness’s Bible (a non Christian cult) has tried hard to alter the Bible for their own purposes. Perhaps this is the one you have which may explain the puzzle of why you cannot see the many references to Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
I am troubled by your charge of intellectual dishonesty. The church has been teaching this stuff for a long time - surely someone would have blown the whistle by now if there was a discrepancy between what the scriptures teach and what the church teaches. However I promise you I will examine scriptures carefully to make sure that I am not misleading people through teaching error.
The Old Testament also has some references pointing to a tri-unity of God but this posting is getting rather long so I can post them later on if you like.
I close with a beautiful prayer of Jesus (John 17)
“Father, the time has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you. For you granted him authority over all people that he might giove eternal life to all those you have given him. Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. I have bought you glory opn earth by completing the work you gave me to do. And now Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.”
Blessings
Muslim Blogger
Thank you for your kind words. But it seems there were some parts of my post that were misunderstood by you. No matter–I will do my best to write more clearly, InshaAllaah.
Concerning Allaah being everywhere, you wrote: “But by saying He would not [be found in the sewers], are you not then undermining the belief of His omnipotence?” Perhaps you meant to say “could not” instead of “would not”? In any case, that is not what I am doing. I am also aware of the difference between the belief in pantheism, which we reject completely, and omnipresence.
The matter is a very specific one, and it concerns Allaah’s location: “fawq as-samaa’” as we would say in Arabic, meaning “above the heavens/skies”, as was confirmed by the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa-sallam), which, in conjunction with other texts, indicates that He has ascended His Throne above the heavens and above His creation.
However, this does not at all limit or hinder His power, rendering Him in any way less than omnipotent; for omnipotent He is. I think you may be confusing His Power, Sight, Knowledge and Hearing with His location. The first three Attributes I mentioned are indeed everywhere; that is, while He is above the heavens, He–due to His power–is still able to see all, hear all and know all.
So if I were trapped under the rubble caused by the earthquakes in China, Allaah would certainly be able to see me in my helpless state, hear my cries for help, and know the fear that is in my heart. With His Power, He would definitely be able to help me, all the while being above the heavens, and not down there with me. The same applies if I were in some undesirable filthy place.
It is beneath His Majesty that He would inhabit such a place alongside me–even for an instant. Similarly, I am able to worship Allaah wherever I am, for all of His earth has been made as a place of worship for us, yet this does not mean He is anywhere but above the heavens.
I said that it is incorrect to say that Jesus (’alayhi as-salaam) is called a word *from* God. However, I myself may be incorrect concerning this. Jesus ‘alayhi as-salaam is Allaah’s Word: His Kalimah. “Kalimah” means “word” in Arabic, and is not “Be” a word? So Jesus (’alayhi as-salaam) is Allaah’s Word “Be” (and it is!), and as I mentioned previously, Jesus ‘alayhi as-salaam came into existence upon Allaah’s speaking of the word “Be”.
Because this is a word that is from Allaah’s Mighty Power, and because it is a word that was spoken to create a great, great man, Allaah refers to Jesus (’alayhi as-salaam) as “His Word”, indicating the high level He affords to His Prophet. At the same time, Allaah says His Spirit was blown into him. Does this mean Allaah’s own personal spirit (and I am not saying He has one) was blown into him? No. It is the same as His Word: this is a spirit *from* Allaah for a great and honorable being–Jesus (’alayhi as-salaam). Therefore, it is only fitting that Allaah refers to it in the possessive form.
Allaah sometimes makes mention of the trinity as it was understood by some of the Christians at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa-sallam), that it is the formation of Allaah, Jesus and his mother, Maryam. The Verse that speaks of this is a specific one targetting a specific group of people from amongst the Christians in that time period and in that place. Yet at other times, Allaah mentions the trinity in general, without mentioning Maryam, the mother of Jesus, ‘alayhumaa as-salaam, and these Verses are general in their application; they target all Christians who profess belief in the trinity.
Remember, the Qur’aan was revealed over a period of 23 years verse by verse in response to the various questions, situations, conflicts, opinions (and so on) that were proposed to and faced by the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa-sallam). A group of Jews once came to him and decided to throw him off, so they asked him about the soul. Immediately, Allaah revealed a Verse that starts off with: “Wa yas’aloonaka ‘an il-rooh” meaning: “And they ask you about the soul” and then Allaah goes on to talk about it, saying that it is from the hidden matters of Allaah that we have not been given knowledge of.
I never said that the father, son and holy spirit were not mentioned; I said that they were never mentioned as being of one single divine origin, thus forming one, single, divine being (in three forms/persons). So just because they are mentioned, it cannot be taken to mean that they are all one and the same. This is what I meant by intellectual dishonesty: the Council of Nicea came up with this concept, that they are all of the same essence, meaning the three of them are in actuality one single God, while at the same time being three. After coming up with this idea, they went back to the text and applied it to the verses.
The Bible only mentions that the father exists, and that he has a son, and that there also exists a holy spirit. In fact, objectively speaking, the verses that mention them can only honestly be understood to mean this: that there are three beings at play–father, son, holy spirit. Nowhere does it say in today’s Bible that they are one and the same; that the three of them are in fact one single god. I would indeed be surprised if you were able to find a verse that speaks of this in such explicit terms.
RevQ8
Re-reading our conversation above, it struck me how important the transcendance of God is to you and that comes across very clearly. God is holy and awesome and like no other.
By contrast, I realise that my emphasis was on the immanence of God. The conviction God is with us and dwelling in us through His Holy Spirit enabling us to live lives that reflect his love for people and for our creator.
Both our scriptures seem to point to a God who is both transcendant and immanent at the same time. One of my favourite Qur’anic verses is where the believer is reminded that God is closer to them than their jugular vein.
Blessings
Today’s Bible makes no mention of the father, son and holy spirit as forming a “Trinity”; a term (and idea) coined by the Council of Nicea. Where it not for them, the Christians of today would have gone on believing in them as three seperate beings/entities.
Furthermore, you being a mother, husband and daughter all at the same time is not the same as God forming a trinity, for in the latter case they are considered to be three but of one same essence; three forms of one origin.
You, however, are of one form, with three *roles*. Your analogy does not work. At the same time, you are also someone’s friend, and if you were a woman with loose morals, you could be another man’s mistress. So far, you are: mother, daughter, wife, friend, mistress. That’s five, and why stop there?
Do you see my point? Yet you are still of one form. If we were to simply go with your earlier example, you being only mother, daughter, and wife, you would have to somehow split into three forms to form a “holy trinity” as envisioned by the Council of Nicea.
Further still, is the most crushing proof against this trinity idea: in today’s Bible, Jesus is mentioned as having prayed to the father (I believe before he was taken to be crucified). For the trinity idea to stick, there would have been no need for the “son” to pray *to* the “father” had they have truly been of one origin.
Can you imagine yourself praying to yourself? Or better yet, asking yourself permission to do something?
I invite you to Islaam, where Allaah, the God of all that exists; the God of Jesus, Moses, Abraham, Joseph and Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon them all, and the God of every other Prophet and Messenger that was sent to mankind, asks us not to believe blindly, but to contemplate His signs–those mentioned in His Book–and to reflect on them, understand and believe in them.
Islaam is a religion devoid of confusion and one where you are not asked to believe in one God that is at the same time of a trinity, despite you not understanding, simply because it is a “mystery.” I invite you to the natural religion, the final one revealed by Allaah to all of the creation, so that you may attain the ultimate success.
RevQ8
Thank you for your input. You are quite right in identifying that the word Trinity is not found in the Bible and that the analogy of one form and three roles is limited. In fact any analogy to describe God will be flawed. The task of trying to precisely describe the nature of God in truth eludes us all.
Islam is very attractive in its simplicity and I look with envy at times at the straightforwardness of the shahada, (especially on a Trinity Sunday when I am supposed to enlighten my congregation with knowledge on this difficult and abstract concept.) First of all I want to affirm that Christians believe that God is one. We are not polytheists or tri-theists. There is only one God who has created the hevens and the earth and all that is within. I can say wihout any hesitation the opening Sura of the Qur’an - there is but one God and He is Lord.
The doctrine of Tawhid or unity in Islam is something else which I think we can agree on. God is omnipresent (he is everywhere), omnipotent (all powerful)and omniscient(all knowing). In short God is God - he can do anything and he is beyond our understanding. I have absolutely no doubt that God is able to reveal himself through revelation - whether through the giving of the law, through the sending of prophets and through the giving of His Word.
Islam itself has an interesting debate about the unity of God when it discusses the question is the Quran eternal or created? Clearly if it is eternal then the Quran shares the attributes of God and therefore implies that God in his Unity can speak words and still be of the same essence. Orthodox Islam determined along time ago that this is indeed the case and those who argued that the Quran was created (The Mutazilite school) were consequently rejected as heretics.
So clearly a Word from God cannot be divided from God himself. In the Islamic faith, the Word is given in the form of a book. The Christian faith however believes that God reveals through the scriptures that the Word came as a person - in flesh. We believe that Jesus Christ is the message of God enshrined in human form. A Word who cannot be distinct from its origins. The Qur’an calls Jesus a word from God. Clearly it allows that Jesus spoke the eternal message of God and somehow enshrined in his person the Word. Tawhid suggests to me therefore that God is a unity which is different from saying God is a being of One who cannot be divided. I am one person and yet my oneness consists of a unity of different parts (head, arms, feet etc).
So the doctrine of Trinity is simply saying that God is a unity who reveals himself in substantially real ways. The whole scripture shouts this from Genesis to the end. For example in Genesis 1 God created the world and his Spirit hovered over the waters and he declares in Genesis 2. Let us make mankind in our image.(implying a plurality in his unity) Then we have the OT prophets who see visions of God which hint that He is a complex unity (see Isaiah or Ezekiels descriptions). I could go on but I won’t bore you.
All I want to say that there is sufficient evidence to point to a Trinitarian God. That evidence is found in the Bible and led to the church councils to try and explain the unexplainable!!
Islam calls us to submit to God and I agree that is our only response to God. I have chosen to submit to God and acknowledge that he has revealed himself as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It is a mystery and I am content to let God be God.
Muslim Blogger
Allaah is certainly omnipotent and omniscient, but to say that He is omnipresent is something we Muslims dare not utter. To those who say He is everywhere, we ask: is He in the sewer, the mud or any other undesirable and filthy place? If by “omnipresent” you intend something general in meaning, then this becomes nothing more than playing with words, for it can only explicitly mean what it says it means–that He is literally everywhere.
Rather, we say: He is above the Heavens; high above the creation. He is the Creator, and as such, He cannot be encompassed or held by or within His creation. However, what is “everywhere” is His knowledge, His sight and His hearing: He knows all, sees all, hears all. What He reveals is His will and His word.
To say that He reveals His Self is to fall short of the Truth, and even while He has ascended His Mighty Throne, there is before Him a veil of light. Even the greatest of the Prophets, Muhammad (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa-sallam) was not able to see him.
As for the Qur’aan, it is inaccurate to say the “Word is given in the form of a book.” The Qur’aan is the uncreated speech of Allaah, revealed to the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa-sallam) through the Angel Jibreel. It was not revealed in a book; it was revealed in stages over a period of 23-years. The Qur’aan does not call Jesus “a word from God.” It is understandable that Christians normally misinterpret the verses that speak of this matter when reading the Qur’aan.
Consider this Verse:
{O people of the Scripture! Do not exceed the limits in your religion, nor say of Allâh aught but the truth. The Messiah ‘Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), was (no more than) a Messenger of Allâh and His Word, (”Be!” - and he was) which He bestowed on Maryam (Mary) and a spirit (Rûh) created by Him; so believe in Allâh and His Messengers.} (An-Nisa 4:171)
As you can see, His “Word” is none other than “Be”, or “Kun” in Arabic. This is from the might of Allaah, that He simply says “Be” and it is. So Jesus (’alayhi as-salaam) was brought into existence by His Word (”Be” and is thus a product of His Word. It is therefore also correct to say that he (Jesus) is His Word. Allaah bestowed this Word upon Maryam by speaking it and intending by it the cause to existence of Jesus (’alayhi as-salaam).
The continuation of this beautiful Verse is:
{Say not: “Three (trinity)!” Cease! (it is) better for you. For Allâh is (the only) One Ilâh (God), Glory be to Him (Far Exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allâh is All-Sufficient as a Disposer of affairs.}
You bring up Tawhid. You said: “I am one person and yet my oneness consists of a unity of different parts (head, arms, feet etc). As I mentioned to the owner of this blog, this is not the same as saying God is one and His oneness consists of a father, son and holy spirit. If you were to lose all of your limbs this instant, your oneness would still be preserved, for it is not dependent on the existence of your limbs, but on your self.
If God, as He is understood by the Christians of today, were to make it so that the son and the holy spirit were non-existant, then His trinity would cease to exist, for it is necesarily dependent on those other two beings–unlike your self and your body’s limbs. It is because of this that it is inaccurate to say that God is a “unity”, for this implies that there exists other things with which He is united. What is He a unity of? His creation? Far be He from any and all imperfections.
This is not Tawhid. Allow me to explain it more clearly. Tawhid, as it is known from the Qur’aan and the Sunnah, is“to single out Allaah alone in creating and managing the affairs, to have sincerity of worship towards Him and to abandon worship of others besides him; as well as to affirm His perfect Names and lofty Attributes and to purify Him from any deficiencies or shortcomings.”–Taken from an article written by Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan.
In order to understand it better, we can effectively categorize Tawhid into three parts:
1)Tawhid ar-Ruboobiyyah, 2) Tawhid al-Uloohiyyah, and 3) Tawhid al-Asmaa’ was-Sifaat.
The first can be defined as thus: It is to single out Allaah alone in His actions, with the belief that He is the only Creator of all the creation.
The second: It is what is contained in the Shahaadah: “Laa ilaaha illa Allaah” or “None has the right to be worshipped except Allaah.” Tawhid al-Uloohiyyah is to single out Allaah (alone) in worship by the actions of the slaves (us) which they do in the manner legislated by the Qur’aan and the Sunnah in order to seek nearness to Him, such as supplication, vowing, sacrifice, hope, fear, trust, awe, dread and turning in repentance.
This type of Tawhid was the essence of the call of all the Messengers and Prophets (’alayhumaa as-salaat was-salaam).
Then there is the third type: It is simply to affirm and believe in (as they are) the perfect Names and lofty Attributes of Allaah.
So this is Tawhid.
You later say that there is sufficient evidence in the Bible to make one understand God as being of a trinity. Do you know for certain that you would have believed in this, or even thought of God in this manner, had it not been for the Council’s proclamation of His trinity? I believe it says in the Bible, and I’m paraphrasing, that the father, son and holy spirit are one.
One what?
You might hear one say to a racist: “We [human beings] are all one.” Here he is implying that we are all one (and the same); that there is no *real* difference between us other than the color of our skin. This person is not saying we are all one being, as the trinity suggests about God.
Why do you simply not understand that verse to mean that the father, son and holy spirit are one in terms of the Truth? That what Jesus came with was True, for it was one with what God is–the Truth. The idea of the trinity is essentially the result of first coming up with an idea (the trinity) and then going back to the Bible to find verses that might lead one to thinking it is true.
A pure case of intellectual dishonesty.
I believe I have replied to the bulf of your argument. I will leave you with the words Jesus (’alayhi as-salaam) will utter on the Day of Judgment:
From Soora al-Maa’idah:
117. “Never did I say to them aught except what You (Allaah) did command me to say: ‘Worship Allaah, my Lord and your Lord.’ And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them, but when You took me up, You were the Watcher over them; and You are a witness to all things.
118. “If You punish them, they are Your slaves, and if You forgive them, verily, You, only You are the All-Mighty, the All-Wise.”
RevQ8
I am enjoying our conversation very much indeed. You are clearly someone who thinks through the Word and your faith deeply and I admire that.
I was interested to see that Muslims do not believe that God is omnipresent (all present) but they do believe He is omnipotent (all powerful). You raise the question “Would you find God in the sewers?” I think if God is all powerful then surely this is not beyond his ability. (Whether He would want to or not is another question!)But by saying He would not, are you not then undermining the belief of His omnipotence? Perhaps you are confusing omnipresnece with Pantheism (the belief that God is in everything - ie; a rock or a tree can be worshipped as God) This clearly would be a heresy.
One of my favourite Psalms (Zabiil) is Psalms 139. In this Psalms David cries out “Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? If I go up to the heavens you are there; if I make my bed in the depths you are there. If I rise on the wings of the dawn, if I settgle on the far side of the sea, even there your right hand will guide me . . .” That to me is omnipresence. We can worship God anywhere and God can meet with us - even in the darkest places of the earth. I read plenty of testimonies for example of prisoners discovering the grace and love of God in the depths of prison. God is not shut out of any place in earth. Even in the sewers! I think of the Chinese earthquake, and think of people trapped under the rubble, the gutters and the sewers and I ask myself “If they cried out to God would they find Him?” I think the Scriptural answer is a resounding “Yes!”. For the good book says “Whoever calls on the name of the LORD will be saved”. (Acts 2.21)
This is the real meaning when we say God is omnipresent.
I was also interested to read your comment that the Qur’an does not call Jesus a Word from God. I checked in my English versions and they all translate Sura 3.45 as Jesus being a Word. You mentioned that in Arabic that this word is “Kun” the command that God gives to create (which it is in the verse you quote). But the word in Arabic (3.45) for Jesus being a word is kalimah, which double checking my dictionary unequivocally means word spoken or written.
It is worth noting that the Trinity which the Qur’an refutes is also refuted by Christians. Jesus is asked in the Qur’an if he has taught people to worship him and Mary as separate Gods and the answer is obviously no. The Quranic portrayal of Trinity is God as Father, Mary as Mother and Jesus as the carnal offspring. Along with the Muslims I agree that this is blasphemy and is not part of the teaching of the church.
I defer to your superior knowledge of the Islamic doctrine of Tawhid recognising that my study is not indepth enough to comment.
I can say though that the evidence of Father, Son and Spirit is clear throughout the Bible. Let me quote a very small sample of many similar verses.
Matthew 3.16-17. As soon as Jesus went out of the water, the heavens opened and the Spirit of God descended like a dove. And a voice from heaven said . This is my Son in whom I am well pleased.”
Matthew 28.9. “Go and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
In Mark 1 John the Baptist proclaims Jesus as one who will baptise his followers with the Holy Spirit.He also refers to the voice from heaven calling Jesus His Son.
In John 16 Jesus tell His disciples that he is returning to the Father and that he will send his Holy Spirit. (verse 10 and 13)
2 Corinthians 13.14 “May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.”
Clearly in the New Testament there is abundant evidence referring to Father, Son and Holy Spirit. So to say that there is no reference to them in the Bible is a fallacy. You can check these verses in English, Greek, Arabic and whichever version you choose - they all say the same. It leaves me wondering which version of the Bible you are reading. I know that the New World translation which is the Jehovah Witness’s Bible (a non Christian cult) has tried hard to alter the Bible for their own purposes. Perhaps this is the one you have which may explain the puzzle of why you cannot see the many references to Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
I am troubled by your charge of intellectual dishonesty. The church has been teaching this stuff for a long time - surely someone would have blown the whistle by now if there was a discrepancy between what the scriptures teach and what the church teaches. However I promise you I will examine scriptures carefully to make sure that I am not misleading people through teaching error.
The Old Testament also has some references pointing to a tri-unity of God but this posting is getting rather long so I can post them later on if you like.
I close with a beautiful prayer of Jesus (John 17)
“Father, the time has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you. For you granted him authority over all people that he might giove eternal life to all those you have given him. Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. I have bought you glory opn earth by completing the work you gave me to do. And now Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.”
Blessings
Muslim Blogger
Thank you for your kind words. But it seems there were some parts of my post that were misunderstood by you. No matter–I will do my best to write more clearly, InshaAllaah.
Concerning Allaah being everywhere, you wrote: “But by saying He would not [be found in the sewers], are you not then undermining the belief of His omnipotence?” Perhaps you meant to say “could not” instead of “would not”? In any case, that is not what I am doing. I am also aware of the difference between the belief in pantheism, which we reject completely, and omnipresence.
The matter is a very specific one, and it concerns Allaah’s location: “fawq as-samaa’” as we would say in Arabic, meaning “above the heavens/skies”, as was confirmed by the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa-sallam), which, in conjunction with other texts, indicates that He has ascended His Throne above the heavens and above His creation.
However, this does not at all limit or hinder His power, rendering Him in any way less than omnipotent; for omnipotent He is. I think you may be confusing His Power, Sight, Knowledge and Hearing with His location. The first three Attributes I mentioned are indeed everywhere; that is, while He is above the heavens, He–due to His power–is still able to see all, hear all and know all.
So if I were trapped under the rubble caused by the earthquakes in China, Allaah would certainly be able to see me in my helpless state, hear my cries for help, and know the fear that is in my heart. With His Power, He would definitely be able to help me, all the while being above the heavens, and not down there with me. The same applies if I were in some undesirable filthy place.
It is beneath His Majesty that He would inhabit such a place alongside me–even for an instant. Similarly, I am able to worship Allaah wherever I am, for all of His earth has been made as a place of worship for us, yet this does not mean He is anywhere but above the heavens.
I said that it is incorrect to say that Jesus (’alayhi as-salaam) is called a word *from* God. However, I myself may be incorrect concerning this. Jesus ‘alayhi as-salaam is Allaah’s Word: His Kalimah. “Kalimah” means “word” in Arabic, and is not “Be” a word? So Jesus (’alayhi as-salaam) is Allaah’s Word “Be” (and it is!), and as I mentioned previously, Jesus ‘alayhi as-salaam came into existence upon Allaah’s speaking of the word “Be”.
Because this is a word that is from Allaah’s Mighty Power, and because it is a word that was spoken to create a great, great man, Allaah refers to Jesus (’alayhi as-salaam) as “His Word”, indicating the high level He affords to His Prophet. At the same time, Allaah says His Spirit was blown into him. Does this mean Allaah’s own personal spirit (and I am not saying He has one) was blown into him? No. It is the same as His Word: this is a spirit *from* Allaah for a great and honorable being–Jesus (’alayhi as-salaam). Therefore, it is only fitting that Allaah refers to it in the possessive form.
Allaah sometimes makes mention of the trinity as it was understood by some of the Christians at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa-sallam), that it is the formation of Allaah, Jesus and his mother, Maryam. The Verse that speaks of this is a specific one targetting a specific group of people from amongst the Christians in that time period and in that place. Yet at other times, Allaah mentions the trinity in general, without mentioning Maryam, the mother of Jesus, ‘alayhumaa as-salaam, and these Verses are general in their application; they target all Christians who profess belief in the trinity.
Remember, the Qur’aan was revealed over a period of 23 years verse by verse in response to the various questions, situations, conflicts, opinions (and so on) that were proposed to and faced by the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa-sallam). A group of Jews once came to him and decided to throw him off, so they asked him about the soul. Immediately, Allaah revealed a Verse that starts off with: “Wa yas’aloonaka ‘an il-rooh” meaning: “And they ask you about the soul” and then Allaah goes on to talk about it, saying that it is from the hidden matters of Allaah that we have not been given knowledge of.
I never said that the father, son and holy spirit were not mentioned; I said that they were never mentioned as being of one single divine origin, thus forming one, single, divine being (in three forms/persons). So just because they are mentioned, it cannot be taken to mean that they are all one and the same. This is what I meant by intellectual dishonesty: the Council of Nicea came up with this concept, that they are all of the same essence, meaning the three of them are in actuality one single God, while at the same time being three. After coming up with this idea, they went back to the text and applied it to the verses.
The Bible only mentions that the father exists, and that he has a son, and that there also exists a holy spirit. In fact, objectively speaking, the verses that mention them can only honestly be understood to mean this: that there are three beings at play–father, son, holy spirit. Nowhere does it say in today’s Bible that they are one and the same; that the three of them are in fact one single god. I would indeed be surprised if you were able to find a verse that speaks of this in such explicit terms.
RevQ8
Re-reading our conversation above, it struck me how important the transcendance of God is to you and that comes across very clearly. God is holy and awesome and like no other.
By contrast, I realise that my emphasis was on the immanence of God. The conviction God is with us and dwelling in us through His Holy Spirit enabling us to live lives that reflect his love for people and for our creator.
Both our scriptures seem to point to a God who is both transcendant and immanent at the same time. One of my favourite Qur’anic verses is where the believer is reminded that God is closer to them than their jugular vein.
Blessings
Monday, 19 May 2008
The Big Elephant in the Room.
One major difference between Islam and Christianity is the doctrine of Trinity. Interfaith dialogue often skirts around the differences and seeks to emphasize the common ground. However Trinity is the big elephant in the room that everyone knows is there but usually are too polite to acknowledge its existence.
Kuwait resident Intlxpatr has a blog in which she raises this issue. There has been a good discussion going on. Check out http://intlxpatr.wordpress.com/ See below for her opening comments.
Trinity Sunday
This was Trinity Sunday, and I hesitate to even bring it up, because it always causes so much misunderstanding between us. No, we don’t believe in three Gods. We believe in one God, who is at the same time Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
I am not a theologian, so what I am about to tell you is just my interpretation of a mystery which has been debated by minds much greater than my own. I tell my Muslim friends that it is like this:
I have a relationship with my husband, as his wife. We communicate in a certain way, we understand one another in a certain way, to my husband, I am his wife.
I am mother to my son, we communicate differently, and he thinks of me as mother.
I am daughter to my mother, and we communicate differently, and she thinks of me as her daughter.
My husband doesn’t think of me as daughter, and neither does my son. I am all three, and yet I am one person.
That is grossly simplified, and God is much more complicated than I can understand. I just wanted you to know, we believe, as Muslims do, that there is one God.
We do not believe God had sex with Mary. We believe Mary conceived by the wish of God, she conceived immaculately, without having had sex. The Angel Gabriel came to her and told her she had been selected, but she could say yes or no, and she said “yes.” Because she said yes, Jesus was born of Mary.
Kuwait resident Intlxpatr has a blog in which she raises this issue. There has been a good discussion going on. Check out http://intlxpatr.wordpress.com/ See below for her opening comments.
Trinity Sunday
This was Trinity Sunday, and I hesitate to even bring it up, because it always causes so much misunderstanding between us. No, we don’t believe in three Gods. We believe in one God, who is at the same time Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
I am not a theologian, so what I am about to tell you is just my interpretation of a mystery which has been debated by minds much greater than my own. I tell my Muslim friends that it is like this:
I have a relationship with my husband, as his wife. We communicate in a certain way, we understand one another in a certain way, to my husband, I am his wife.
I am mother to my son, we communicate differently, and he thinks of me as mother.
I am daughter to my mother, and we communicate differently, and she thinks of me as her daughter.
My husband doesn’t think of me as daughter, and neither does my son. I am all three, and yet I am one person.
That is grossly simplified, and God is much more complicated than I can understand. I just wanted you to know, we believe, as Muslims do, that there is one God.
We do not believe God had sex with Mary. We believe Mary conceived by the wish of God, she conceived immaculately, without having had sex. The Angel Gabriel came to her and told her she had been selected, but she could say yes or no, and she said “yes.” Because she said yes, Jesus was born of Mary.
Thursday, 15 May 2008
Condolences
On the sad occasion of the death of the former Emir, Sheikh Saad Al Abdullah Al Salem Al Sabah we send our deepest condolences.
During the Iraqi invasion, he was a leader who inspired the Kuwaiti nation to never lose hope in her future. We as a church will remember the people of Kuwait in prayer.
Monday, 5 May 2008
Interfaith Speaker in Kuwait
May 8:Lecture- A special model for Muslim women in a modern society
"A special model for Muslim women in a modern society"at 7p by Ms. Zainab Al-Suwaij,
Executive Director of the American International Congress.
An outspoken advocate for womens equality and interfaith understanding, Zainab has published editorials in the three largest American newspapers: The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and USA Today. She has appeared on NPR, BBC, Al-Jazeera, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, and Fox. Over the past several years, Zainab has directed AICs womens empowerment programs in southern Iraq, leading a grassroots team that operates without international security. She has testified to Congress, lectured at Harvard, and participated in interfaith events around the world. Named an "Ambassador of Peace" by the Interreligious and International Peace Council, Zainab has received Dialogue on Diversitys Liberty Award and was recognized as "2006 International Person of the Year" by the National Liberty Museum. Her lecture will be conducted in English. All are welcome to attend.
Time: 7pm
Speaker: Ms. Zainab Al-Suwaij
"A special model for Muslim women in a modern society"at 7p by Ms. Zainab Al-Suwaij,
Executive Director of the American International Congress.
An outspoken advocate for womens equality and interfaith understanding, Zainab has published editorials in the three largest American newspapers: The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and USA Today. She has appeared on NPR, BBC, Al-Jazeera, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, and Fox. Over the past several years, Zainab has directed AICs womens empowerment programs in southern Iraq, leading a grassroots team that operates without international security. She has testified to Congress, lectured at Harvard, and participated in interfaith events around the world. Named an "Ambassador of Peace" by the Interreligious and International Peace Council, Zainab has received Dialogue on Diversitys Liberty Award and was recognized as "2006 International Person of the Year" by the National Liberty Museum. Her lecture will be conducted in English. All are welcome to attend.
Time: 7pm
Speaker: Ms. Zainab Al-Suwaij
Tuesday, 15 April 2008
The Love Languages of God
Tonight I was at the AWARE centre to listen to the Love Languages of God. The speaker was an American called Kevin Stodos and he was sooooooooo good. I was very impressed with his powerpoint presentation and he was a first class example of Christian Muslim Relations at work.
Firstly he has been going regularly to the Diwaniya at the AWARE centre and they have gotten to know him and trust him. Secondly he was willing to offer his skills as a teacher to talk on this subject.
His presentation was essentially based on the work by an Amerian Christian author -Gary Chapman , who outlines 5 love languages. These are 1) Words of Affirmation 2) Quality time 3) Gifts 4) Acts of Service 5) Physical Touch.
He went on to give Biblical examples of how God has revealed His love to us in these different love languages. Although I am familiar with the concept of Love Languages this was the first time I have seen it applied to the religious context.
Kevin got the Muslims there to apply this model to the five pillars of Islam and it made for a stimulating evening.
Great job Kevin! I was inspired by your example. Your presentation deserves to have a bigger audience. Kevin also writes a thought provoking blog with essays online with his views on life in Kuwait and Christian Muslim issues. It is worth a visit. Check out http://alone.gnn.tv/users/blogs.php
Kevin worships at the Internatonal Church of Christ in Kuwait city. Thanks too to the AWARE centre for their creative diwaniyas and excellent hospitality. I was blessed.
Firstly he has been going regularly to the Diwaniya at the AWARE centre and they have gotten to know him and trust him. Secondly he was willing to offer his skills as a teacher to talk on this subject.
His presentation was essentially based on the work by an Amerian Christian author -Gary Chapman , who outlines 5 love languages. These are 1) Words of Affirmation 2) Quality time 3) Gifts 4) Acts of Service 5) Physical Touch.
He went on to give Biblical examples of how God has revealed His love to us in these different love languages. Although I am familiar with the concept of Love Languages this was the first time I have seen it applied to the religious context.
Kevin got the Muslims there to apply this model to the five pillars of Islam and it made for a stimulating evening.
Great job Kevin! I was inspired by your example. Your presentation deserves to have a bigger audience. Kevin also writes a thought provoking blog with essays online with his views on life in Kuwait and Christian Muslim issues. It is worth a visit. Check out http://alone.gnn.tv/users/blogs.php
Kevin worships at the Internatonal Church of Christ in Kuwait city. Thanks too to the AWARE centre for their creative diwaniyas and excellent hospitality. I was blessed.
Friday, 4 April 2008
Scripture Reasoning
Well, they are doing it in USA, UK, Europe and in some countries in the Middle East. Scripture Reasoning is rapidly becoming the way to do inter faith dialogue. So what is it?
Scriptural Reasoning is a text study between Christians and Muslims and Jews. It is a practice where members of these faiths in small groups, study together, their own and each other's religious texts. The act of engaging openly and honestly with each scripture and allowing the texts to speak for themselves has proved to be a winning strategy.
Selected scriptures from each text are laid side by side and each member of the group is invited to read the text and feed back to their group what they think the text is saying. This is done after someone presents what their own scripture means to them coming from their faith tradition.
The beauty of this approach is that it allows the scriptures to speak for themselves. At the heart of each monotheisitc faith are the scriptures which all belive conveys God's message to the world. Scripture Reasoning allows God to speak to each person through the sacred books without compromising one's own faith.
I wonder if this could ever work in Kuwait? Obviously the number of Jews here would be minimal, so I guess it would have to be just Christians and Muslims.
If I can find six Christians and six Muslims willing to have a go at this then I would love to make it happen. Any takers?
For more information on Scripture Reasoning check out the related websites on the blog list.
Blessings
Sunday, 30 March 2008
Spot the Difference
One of my favourite blogs on kuwait is http://intlxpatr.wordpress.com/
There is so much here about life in Kuwait in general, and every now and then there are issues raised to do with religion in Kuwait.
One of the latest entries titled "Minarets", shows photographs of minarets in Kuwait and asks if you can identify them as belonging to a mosque used by Sunni or Shi'a.
It is possible - click on the link above to find out how you can recognise the difference.
Enjoy
Thursday, 27 March 2008
A popular guiding principle for Christians is WWJD or What Would Jesus Do? It was interesting to see an Islamic equivalent presented as What Would Prophet Muhammad Do? See Article below.
What Would Muhammad Do?
From Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR
Muslim Response to Cartoon Controversy
"You do not do evil to those who do evil to you, but you deal with them with forgiveness and kindness." (Sahih Al-Bukhari)
That description of Islam's Prophet Muhammad is a summary of how he reacted to personal attacks and abuse.
Islamic traditions include a number of instances of the prophet having the opportunity to strike back at those who attacked him, but refraining from doing so.
These traditions are particularly important as we witness outrage in the Islamic world over cartoons, initially published in a Danish newspaper, that were viewed as intentional attacks on the prophet.
Peaceful and not-so-peaceful protests have occurred from Gaza to Indonesia. Boycotts have targeted companies based in Denmark and in other nations that reprinted the offensive caricatures.
As Muslims, we need to take a step back and ask ourselves, "What would the Prophet Muhammad do?"
Muslims are taught the tradition of the woman who would regularly throw trash on the prophet as he walked down a particular path. The prophet never responded in kind to the woman's abuse. Instead, when she one day failed to attack him, he went to her home to inquire about her condition.
In another tradition, the prophet was offered the opportunity to have God punish the people of a town near Mecca who refused the message of Islam and attacked him with stones. Again, the prophet did not choose to respond in kind to the abuse.
When he returned to Mecca after years of exile and personal attacks, he did not take revenge on the people of the city, but instead offered a general amnesty.
The Quran also says: "Invite (all) to the way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching, and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for thy Lord knows best who have strayed from His Path and who receive guidance." (16:125)
Another verse tells the prophet to "show forgiveness, speak for justice and avoid the ignorant." (7:199)
These are the examples that Muslims should follow as they express justifiable concern at the publication of the cartoons.
What Would Muhammad Do?
From Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR
Muslim Response to Cartoon Controversy
"You do not do evil to those who do evil to you, but you deal with them with forgiveness and kindness." (Sahih Al-Bukhari)
That description of Islam's Prophet Muhammad is a summary of how he reacted to personal attacks and abuse.
Islamic traditions include a number of instances of the prophet having the opportunity to strike back at those who attacked him, but refraining from doing so.
These traditions are particularly important as we witness outrage in the Islamic world over cartoons, initially published in a Danish newspaper, that were viewed as intentional attacks on the prophet.
Peaceful and not-so-peaceful protests have occurred from Gaza to Indonesia. Boycotts have targeted companies based in Denmark and in other nations that reprinted the offensive caricatures.
As Muslims, we need to take a step back and ask ourselves, "What would the Prophet Muhammad do?"
Muslims are taught the tradition of the woman who would regularly throw trash on the prophet as he walked down a particular path. The prophet never responded in kind to the woman's abuse. Instead, when she one day failed to attack him, he went to her home to inquire about her condition.
In another tradition, the prophet was offered the opportunity to have God punish the people of a town near Mecca who refused the message of Islam and attacked him with stones. Again, the prophet did not choose to respond in kind to the abuse.
When he returned to Mecca after years of exile and personal attacks, he did not take revenge on the people of the city, but instead offered a general amnesty.
The Quran also says: "Invite (all) to the way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching, and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for thy Lord knows best who have strayed from His Path and who receive guidance." (16:125)
Another verse tells the prophet to "show forgiveness, speak for justice and avoid the ignorant." (7:199)
These are the examples that Muslims should follow as they express justifiable concern at the publication of the cartoons.
Monday, 24 March 2008
Conversions
The high profile event of the Pope baptising a Muslim convert to Catholicism has drawn some strong reactions.
The local Italian Muslim leadership voiced their protests and asked why not just have a low profile local parish baptism. They feel that such a media saturated event is a deliberate provocation.
The convert himself, an outspoken critic of Islam argues that while one can convert from Christianity to Islam without fear of negative consequences from the Christian community the same does not seem to be true for those who convert from Islam to Christianity. He felt that the Catholic church should be moAll the schools of Islamic law treat apostasy (ie; leaving Islam) as a serious crime which requires the death penalty to be applied.
As an outsider to Islam I find the apostasy law rather extreme. Is there someone out there who can explain to me why this is so important? I am just trying to understand, that's all.
Blessings
The local Italian Muslim leadership voiced their protests and asked why not just have a low profile local parish baptism. They feel that such a media saturated event is a deliberate provocation.
The convert himself, an outspoken critic of Islam argues that while one can convert from Christianity to Islam without fear of negative consequences from the Christian community the same does not seem to be true for those who convert from Islam to Christianity. He felt that the Catholic church should be moAll the schools of Islamic law treat apostasy (ie; leaving Islam) as a serious crime which requires the death penalty to be applied.
As an outsider to Islam I find the apostasy law rather extreme. Is there someone out there who can explain to me why this is so important? I am just trying to understand, that's all.
Blessings
Tuesday, 18 March 2008
Are we talking about the same God?
Are we talking about the same God? For Muslims and Christians to begin talking with one another about religion, there is a requirement that we share some common assumptions. The first most basic assumption is that we agree that we are talking about the same God. This is not as basic as it seems, for there are those Christians and Muslims who will vehemently assert that the Muslim and Christian God are completely different entities.
Colin Chapman presents a helpful analogy.
Suppose there is a country somwhere in the world where the sun is never clearly visible. People are aware of the sun, because they can see the shape of the sun behind the clouds, and know that the sun is the source of heat. But they can never see the sun in a cloudless sky. Contrast this with people who live in the Mediterranean. They see the sun very clearly, and feel its heat. Is it the same sun for both people in both places? It must of course be the same sun, although each group of people have very different images and experience of it.
If we cannot accept this analogy, we have to think in terms of two completely different astronomical bodies, such as the sun and the moon and assume that Muslims and Christians are talking about two completely diffferent beings. That assumption is likely to make communication between Christians and Muslims extremely difficult, if not impossible.
What do you think?
Are we talking about the same God?
For Muslims and Christians to begin talking with one another about religion, there is a requirement that we share some common assumptions. The first most basic assumption is that we agree that we are talking about the same God. This is not as basic as it seems, for there are those Christians and Muslims who will vehemently assert that the Muslim and Christian God are completely different entities.
Colin Chapman presents a helpful analogy.
Suppose there is a country somwhere in the world where the sun is never clearly visible. People are aware of the sun, because they can see the shape of the sun behind the clouds, and know that the sun is the source of heat. But they can never see the sun in a cloudless sky. Contrast this with people who live in the Mediterranean. They see the sun very clearly, and feel its heat. Is it the same sun for both people in both places? It must of course be the same sun, although each group of people have very different images and experience of it.
If we cannot accept this analogy, we have to think in terms of two completely different astronomical bodies, such as the sun and the moon and assume that Muslims and Christians are talking about two completely diffferent beings. That assumption is likely to make communication between Christians and Muslims extremely difficult, if not impossible.
What do you think?
Tuesday, 11 March 2008
It's good to talk
I find it hard to find groups of people in Kuwait who are willing to engage in inter faith discussion. Admittedly I think there is a real fear that it will all boil down to having an argument or having our own beliefs minimalised by the other.
But if the real intention is to make genuine friendships (which takes time for sure) then we should not be threatened by exploring our similarities and differences. The more we understand about each other the better we can relate.
As Kuwait has the highest number of bloggers in the world per capita, a blog seems the best place. The Kuwait blogging community is diverse and fascinating and there is plenty going on.
It's good to talk
revq8
But if the real intention is to make genuine friendships (which takes time for sure) then we should not be threatened by exploring our similarities and differences. The more we understand about each other the better we can relate.
As Kuwait has the highest number of bloggers in the world per capita, a blog seems the best place. The Kuwait blogging community is diverse and fascinating and there is plenty going on.
It's good to talk
revq8
Monday, 10 March 2008
Abraham had many sons
EID AL-ADHA commemorates the sacrifice that was required of Abraham . In both the Biblical and the Quranic scriptures Abraham is an esteemed man of the Almighty God who displayed his obedience to God by being willing to ritually slaughter his own son. At the last moment, God intervenes and offers a ram as a substitute for Abraham’s son. The Bible says the son was Isaac and the Muslims say it was Ismael . The point of the story, however, is two-fold. One is that God calls us to obey, Abraham certainly took that obedience to its extreme. Secondly, that we thank God for his provision. Since the beginning of Islam, a ram or a sheep has been ritually sacrificed in remembrance of that event in the life of Abraham.
Abraham is often touted as a unifying motif when it comes to interfaith relations. All three of the world’s monotheistic faiths honour Abraham as a faithful servant of God. Both Arabs and Jews trace their ancestry back to him, and the story of his family is regularly told in synagogues, churches and mosques. His faith in God was unswerving. But more than anything else the story of Abraham focuses on the character of God. God is shown to be true and faithful to his promises to Abraham.
One of the promises that God made to Abraham was to produce many descendants. This seemed unattainable because Abraham was elderly and his wife was past her child bearing years. Yet, many centuries later we do indeed see the physical and spiritual descendants of Abraham numbering more than the grains of sand. As I greet my Muslim friends with Eid Mubarak, I am reminded of our common ancestry and the startling thought that we are related. How on earth do we reconcile centuries of division? I suspect the solution could be found in a sacrificial lamb.
Sunday, 9 March 2008
Young People and Faith
Jesus once summarised the divine law into two commandments. “Love God and love your neighbour” was his pithy sound-bite. As the sectarian violence within and between faith communities continue to rage in Iraq and beyond I often speculate as to how we can apply Jesus’ teachings into this arena.
It seems to me that the most effective way is through an educational encounter between young members of different faiths. One project I was involved with in Birmingham was called Young People and Faith. It was designed by an inner city schools worker called Andrew Smith. He drew up an educational program which he felt would help to encounter the ignorance and prejudice which was a daily feature in the life of inner city school students.To see this project in action was a wonderful experience. Two groups of students representing different faiths (on this day it was Christian and Muslim) were to spend the day together.
The morning started with ‘icebreaker’ type questions such as “What kind of music do you enjoy listening to?” “What are your favourite movies?” “What do you do at the weekend?” And so on. They did talk about their religion and described their religious communal life and how they felt and experienced their respective faith. There was no proselytizing but rather a sharing of what God meant to them.
There was also a basic introduction to both faiths given by a representative of that faith. What really united the young people however was their shared sense of injustice and their common concerns about drug abuse, bullying and prejudice.As the day progressed, it was so encouraging to see the atmosphere transform from mutual wariness to a warm and light acceptance. Laughter broke out, jokes were shared.
The end of the day was marked by going out to a bowling alley where the two groups mixing freely now, swapped phone numbers and e-mail addresses with promises of keeping in touch.
For those young people, barriers of ignorance and hostility had been breached with trust and laughter. It is difficult to be prejudiced against someone who is your friend. All this was achieved in the space of one day.
Clearly it will take a lot longer for the damaged young people in places like Iraq and Palestine. It is not impossible though. For example, summer camps bringing together Palestinian youth and Jewish youth have done much to neutralise the hatred fostering in their young hearts towards one another. It is but just a small step in seeking to “Love God and love our neighbour.”
Do you think we will ever see something like this take place in Kuwait?
Friday, 7 March 2008
Any Kuwaiti women going to this?
Can women find unique ways out of war?
New Delhi - Sakena Yacoobi well knows the hardships of Afghan women, caught between a war and the hopelessness of poverty and illiteracy.
Yet on International Women's Day Saturday, the Afghan educator will not ask the world to help Afghan women. Instead, she will ask Afghan women to help the world.
In a time of growing conflict around the world, she believes the wisdom and compassion of women can offer a way out. "Women bring tolerance and patience," she says. "Women can bring solutions – we cannot accomplish that with weapons."
She is one of several hundred prominent female leaders from 45 countries who have come to India this week to seek ways to raise women's voices worldwide, hoping that their ideas – so often ignored – begin to move the world away from war.
It is a unique approach to International Women's Day – and intentionally so, says Dena Merriam, who has organized "Making Way for the Feminine," a five-day conference that began Thursday in Jaipur.
"This is not about empowering women," says Ms. Merriam, who also co-chaired the United Nations' Millennium World Peace Summit in 2000. "It is about how women can transform society to help us find new ways of addressing conflict."
There are men here, too. The goal, participants say, is not to antagonize men. Yet each believes that women bring to the issue of conflict resolution a different perspective. Many liken it to that of a mother, stern but caring, and more open to finding alternatives to violence.
That perspective is sorely needed, they say, as the path of power and aggression has led only to more fighting and division. "The feminine gifts of compassion, empathy, and caring prepare women for the urgent role as leaders and reconcilers," said the Rev. Joan Brown Campbell, chairwoman of the Global Peace Initiative for Women, at the opening press conference.
"This is about whether women, with men as their partners, can chart a new course," continues Ms. Campbell, who has worked with leaders such as Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr., and Bill Clinton.
The outlines of that new course can be seen in the lives of those attending, both men and women.
It is evident in the compassion of Ali Abu Awwad, a Palestinian who has been imprisoned for his family's political activities and whose brother was killed in the second intifada, yet started a foundation for Israelis and Palestinians who have lost relatives in the conflict.
"The idea is to show people that if you are in the peaceful way, you are not alone," he says. "You do not need to be afraid."
These are the voices that this conference hopes to amplify and inspire. Organizer Merriam acknowledges that the conference has an enormous task. The intent is to begin to change how the world thinks about power – spreading the notion that nonviolent solutions are practical and not the fruit of weakness.
Her tools, she says, are the participants themselves. With few women voices in the corridors of power, the hope is to kindle greater awareness and confidence among women so they become more active participants in demanding a solution.
In recognition of the fact that many of the world's conflicts come from a clash of faiths, the conference has an overtly religious theme. It is bringing together female spiritual leaders from all faiths – such as an Islamic scholar, Buddhist nun, Hindu guru, and members of the Christian clergy.
To this end, Merriam hopes the conference will bring a World Council of Women Spiritual Leaders, which would be a mechanism to guide and advance more inclusive solutions to global problems.
Yet many of the attendees say the gathering in itself, regardless of its outcome, enables them to carry out their work.
Yacoobi needs such spiritual refreshment, she says frankly. "Coming here allows me to collect myself from all the things going on in Afghanistan," she says. "This war is destroying our country, our religion, and our faith, but coming here and seeing these people gives me a lot of energy to believe."
A psychologist in the West Bank, Laila Atshan, too, sees the worst of war – wives who have lost husbands and sons in the conflict with Israel. "I will go back stronger to give them strength," she says. For years, she has considered opening an interfaith community center. "I am hoping this will give me the guts to go do it."
New Delhi - Sakena Yacoobi well knows the hardships of Afghan women, caught between a war and the hopelessness of poverty and illiteracy.
Yet on International Women's Day Saturday, the Afghan educator will not ask the world to help Afghan women. Instead, she will ask Afghan women to help the world.
In a time of growing conflict around the world, she believes the wisdom and compassion of women can offer a way out. "Women bring tolerance and patience," she says. "Women can bring solutions – we cannot accomplish that with weapons."
She is one of several hundred prominent female leaders from 45 countries who have come to India this week to seek ways to raise women's voices worldwide, hoping that their ideas – so often ignored – begin to move the world away from war.
It is a unique approach to International Women's Day – and intentionally so, says Dena Merriam, who has organized "Making Way for the Feminine," a five-day conference that began Thursday in Jaipur.
"This is not about empowering women," says Ms. Merriam, who also co-chaired the United Nations' Millennium World Peace Summit in 2000. "It is about how women can transform society to help us find new ways of addressing conflict."
There are men here, too. The goal, participants say, is not to antagonize men. Yet each believes that women bring to the issue of conflict resolution a different perspective. Many liken it to that of a mother, stern but caring, and more open to finding alternatives to violence.
That perspective is sorely needed, they say, as the path of power and aggression has led only to more fighting and division. "The feminine gifts of compassion, empathy, and caring prepare women for the urgent role as leaders and reconcilers," said the Rev. Joan Brown Campbell, chairwoman of the Global Peace Initiative for Women, at the opening press conference.
"This is about whether women, with men as their partners, can chart a new course," continues Ms. Campbell, who has worked with leaders such as Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr., and Bill Clinton.
The outlines of that new course can be seen in the lives of those attending, both men and women.
It is evident in the compassion of Ali Abu Awwad, a Palestinian who has been imprisoned for his family's political activities and whose brother was killed in the second intifada, yet started a foundation for Israelis and Palestinians who have lost relatives in the conflict.
"The idea is to show people that if you are in the peaceful way, you are not alone," he says. "You do not need to be afraid."
These are the voices that this conference hopes to amplify and inspire. Organizer Merriam acknowledges that the conference has an enormous task. The intent is to begin to change how the world thinks about power – spreading the notion that nonviolent solutions are practical and not the fruit of weakness.
Her tools, she says, are the participants themselves. With few women voices in the corridors of power, the hope is to kindle greater awareness and confidence among women so they become more active participants in demanding a solution.
In recognition of the fact that many of the world's conflicts come from a clash of faiths, the conference has an overtly religious theme. It is bringing together female spiritual leaders from all faiths – such as an Islamic scholar, Buddhist nun, Hindu guru, and members of the Christian clergy.
To this end, Merriam hopes the conference will bring a World Council of Women Spiritual Leaders, which would be a mechanism to guide and advance more inclusive solutions to global problems.
Yet many of the attendees say the gathering in itself, regardless of its outcome, enables them to carry out their work.
Yacoobi needs such spiritual refreshment, she says frankly. "Coming here allows me to collect myself from all the things going on in Afghanistan," she says. "This war is destroying our country, our religion, and our faith, but coming here and seeing these people gives me a lot of energy to believe."
A psychologist in the West Bank, Laila Atshan, too, sees the worst of war – wives who have lost husbands and sons in the conflict with Israel. "I will go back stronger to give them strength," she says. For years, she has considered opening an interfaith community center. "I am hoping this will give me the guts to go do it."
Tuesday, 4 March 2008
New Bishop Visit Kuwait
Bishop Michael Lewis completed his first trip to Kuwait this week. He met with various religious and political leaders and enjoyed the diversity of Kuwait's cultural landscape.
A former Bishop of Middleton in Manchester he particiapted in and led a number of inter-faith events and projects.
One incident which occurred during his visit to Kuwait was completely impromptu and unexpected. While getting out the car in a public carpark we were approached by two women. One of them knew the chaplain and introduced her friend. She was a Kuwaiti Muslim lady who on meeting the Bishop requested him to pray for her. So we stood in the car park and prayed. Two English Christians, an Indian Hindu and a Kuwaiti Muslim. We parted company with warm smiles and farewells.
The best inter-faith events seem to be the spontaneous and unscripted ones. There in a carpark we saw the spirit of God unite us in prayer. How good is that!
Blessings
Monday, 25 February 2008
Is Allah the God of Muslims and Christians?
In Kuwait I hear frequent mention of Allah. I see the name of Allah inscribed on houses and mosques. Allah is mentioned in the many daily salutations. The name of God is overwhelmingly present in the market place and the home. For a Westerner coming from a secularised society where God is mentioned with embarrassed undertones - I find Islamic society wonderfully liberating.
A frequent question that arises surrounds the use of the term Allah. There was case recently where Malaysian Muslims prevented Christians from using the name Allah in their written Christian books. Muslims objected that Christians were taking a name which was exclusively for the use of Islamic believers.
Allah is an Arabic word which literally means "The God". Linguuists see a similarity to the Syriac term "elah" used in the ancient liturgies which in turn has a family resemblance to the Hebrew form for God in which we see used in the Bible in its plural form as "elohim". Although some scholars claim that Allah is the name for some pre-Islamic moon Goddess, other evidence shows that Allah was widely understood in pagan pre-Ismaic Arabia as the chief God who was creator of all and was supreme over every God. The shout Allahu akbar (literally God is greater) relates the supremacy of Allah in relation to other gods.
Christians have used the term Allah as the word for God ever since the Bible was translated into Arabic. For Christian Arabs there is no question of Allah is referring anything but to the God who created the heavens and the earth, and the God who sent the prophets to bring his message to the peoples of the earth.
The real question is - "Do we share the same understanding of Allah's character and work?" Our answer to this will reveal many similarities as well as difference. We both believe Allah is the creator, He is good, He is powerful, He is the Judge, He is Compassionate and Merciful, He is Lord and so on.
The differences begin to emerge when we look at issues of transcendance and imminence. Orthodox islam stresses the unknowability and "otherness" of God while Christianity talks of Allah in shockingly personal terms - for example Jesus taught his disciples to address Allah as "abba" an intimate term which literally translates as "daddy!"
Misunderstanding also arises when we talk about the Tawhid or the unity of God. The doctrine of Trinity can mislead Muslims into believing that Allah has been divided up into three persons. this would then make Christianity a polytheistic faith. Clearly Christianity is not. Along wih Judaism and Islam it declares its monotheism in the words of the Creed "We believe in one God . . ."
That Allah is one in his unity is a conviction shared by us all. The question of how that unity is manifest in the world is when we begin to enter into the realms of Trinitatrian doctrine. For Muslims, God chooses to interact with His creation through the medium of the oral word - given through prophets or angels (messengers). These are then written into text form. That, however would be the extent to which we can know God. His thoughts and messages given to us is through spoken and written word. This however does not violate the unity of God. For Christians, the Word becomes flesh takes this principle further. As the spoken and written word does not violate the essential unity of God, neither does God coming in human form. Perhaps there is a hint of this in the Qur'anic description of Jesus as a "Spirit from God".
What do you think?
A frequent question that arises surrounds the use of the term Allah. There was case recently where Malaysian Muslims prevented Christians from using the name Allah in their written Christian books. Muslims objected that Christians were taking a name which was exclusively for the use of Islamic believers.
Allah is an Arabic word which literally means "The God". Linguuists see a similarity to the Syriac term "elah" used in the ancient liturgies which in turn has a family resemblance to the Hebrew form for God in which we see used in the Bible in its plural form as "elohim". Although some scholars claim that Allah is the name for some pre-Islamic moon Goddess, other evidence shows that Allah was widely understood in pagan pre-Ismaic Arabia as the chief God who was creator of all and was supreme over every God. The shout Allahu akbar (literally God is greater) relates the supremacy of Allah in relation to other gods.
Christians have used the term Allah as the word for God ever since the Bible was translated into Arabic. For Christian Arabs there is no question of Allah is referring anything but to the God who created the heavens and the earth, and the God who sent the prophets to bring his message to the peoples of the earth.
The real question is - "Do we share the same understanding of Allah's character and work?" Our answer to this will reveal many similarities as well as difference. We both believe Allah is the creator, He is good, He is powerful, He is the Judge, He is Compassionate and Merciful, He is Lord and so on.
The differences begin to emerge when we look at issues of transcendance and imminence. Orthodox islam stresses the unknowability and "otherness" of God while Christianity talks of Allah in shockingly personal terms - for example Jesus taught his disciples to address Allah as "abba" an intimate term which literally translates as "daddy!"
Misunderstanding also arises when we talk about the Tawhid or the unity of God. The doctrine of Trinity can mislead Muslims into believing that Allah has been divided up into three persons. this would then make Christianity a polytheistic faith. Clearly Christianity is not. Along wih Judaism and Islam it declares its monotheism in the words of the Creed "We believe in one God . . ."
That Allah is one in his unity is a conviction shared by us all. The question of how that unity is manifest in the world is when we begin to enter into the realms of Trinitatrian doctrine. For Muslims, God chooses to interact with His creation through the medium of the oral word - given through prophets or angels (messengers). These are then written into text form. That, however would be the extent to which we can know God. His thoughts and messages given to us is through spoken and written word. This however does not violate the unity of God. For Christians, the Word becomes flesh takes this principle further. As the spoken and written word does not violate the essential unity of God, neither does God coming in human form. Perhaps there is a hint of this in the Qur'anic description of Jesus as a "Spirit from God".
What do you think?
Tuesday, 19 February 2008
A Church in Qatar?
The debate in Qatar over new church buildings has made me appreciate once again the religious freedom we do have here in Kuwait. Although other Gulf countries do allow church buildings, Kuwait led the way with a constitution that enshrined freedom for other faith groups right from day one. Saudi Arabia by contrast has a constitution which expressly forbids the expression of any form of religion except for Islam (and then only certain forms of Islam).
All the Gulf states play host to a large expatriate community who represent different faiths. Following the time honoured tradition of hospitality which is a much vaunted feature of Arabian society, Christians and other groups have been welcomed and accommodated in most of the Gulf countries. The success of the Gulf economies is very much a tribute to the combined team efforts of both local and expatriate workers working together in harmony.
What happens when there is no freedom of religion?
For the Christian, nothing much. They will continue to work hard and seek to be good neighbours and be a blessing to their hosts. While the word “church”” for most people denotes a building used for Christian worship, the Bible refers to “church” as a people. Literally translated the Greek word for church ‘ex-clesia’ means ‘to call out’. We should therefore not be tied down to a special building in order to pray.
Having said that, Christianity, like all religions, is a communal faith, and in the absence of a special building, Christians will gather together wherever they can. Sometimes they meet in schools or villas or even in restaurants. But there is absolutely no need to erect a huge building and plant a big cross on the top. They do appreciate it though when it is possible to have a building set aside just to meet as a group.
What seem to lie behind the protest in Qatar, is the fear that a church will become a centre for proselytizing Muslims. Proselytizing is defined as an activity where one engages in trying to persuade through propaganda, manipulation or coercion one person to adopt a religion. Although Christianity is a missionary faith, proselytizing as defined above finds no place in the teaching of scripture.
Should Qatar, allow the building of a church? That is entirely up to her. As Christians we are taught explicitly in scripture to obey the law of the land. One thing is certain, whatever happens Christians will continue to worship together, be it discretely in a villa or in a purpose built worship centre.
The debate in Qatar over new church buildings has made me appreciate once again the religious freedom we do have here in Kuwait. Although other Gulf countries do allow church buildings, Kuwait led the way with a constitution that enshrined freedom for other faith groups right from day one. Saudi Arabia by contrast has a constitution which expressly forbids the expression of any form of religion except for Islam (and then only certain forms of Islam).
All the Gulf states play host to a large expatriate community who represent different faiths. Following the time honoured tradition of hospitality which is a much vaunted feature of Arabian society, Christians and other groups have been welcomed and accommodated in most of the Gulf countries. The success of the Gulf economies is very much a tribute to the combined team efforts of both local and expatriate workers working together in harmony.
What happens when there is no freedom of religion?
For the Christian, nothing much. They will continue to work hard and seek to be good neighbours and be a blessing to their hosts. While the word “church”” for most people denotes a building used for Christian worship, the Bible refers to “church” as a people. Literally translated the Greek word for church ‘ex-clesia’ means ‘to call out’. We should therefore not be tied down to a special building in order to pray.
Having said that, Christianity, like all religions, is a communal faith, and in the absence of a special building, Christians will gather together wherever they can. Sometimes they meet in schools or villas or even in restaurants. But there is absolutely no need to erect a huge building and plant a big cross on the top. They do appreciate it though when it is possible to have a building set aside just to meet as a group.
What seem to lie behind the protest in Qatar, is the fear that a church will become a centre for proselytizing Muslims. Proselytizing is defined as an activity where one engages in trying to persuade through propaganda, manipulation or coercion one person to adopt a religion. Although Christianity is a missionary faith, proselytizing as defined above finds no place in the teaching of scripture.
Should Qatar, allow the building of a church? That is entirely up to her. As Christians we are taught explicitly in scripture to obey the law of the land. One thing is certain, whatever happens Christians will continue to worship together, be it discretely in a villa or in a purpose built worship centre.
Monday, 18 February 2008
Is the veil Muslim or Christian in origin?
Sign of rebellion against Ataturk
Halit Refig, one of Turkey’s leading intellectuals, is a filmmaker/ screenwriter whose films include “Four Women in the Harem” and “Island of the Dogs.” He is also on the board of NPQ-Turkey. — EditorBy Halit Refig
ISTANBUL: The headscarf controversy is taking the place of PKK terrorism and Kurdish separatism as the most contentious issue in Turkish political life. Civil disobedience is replacing bloody terrorism, which seems to have lost its initiative since the aerial bombings of PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ Party) camps in northern Iraq. The new militants against the state order are not armed men, but girls with covered heads who refuse to obey the rules of university education because of their religious faith. But the target is the same: Turkish central state power established under the leadership of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. These rebellious girls do not cover their heads with the traditional Turkish headscarf. For this reason, it is given the distinctive name “turban.” It is a kind of uniform. Turkey didn’t have such a turban problem until the 1980s. Indeed, there was no headscarf problem in Turkey until the Khomeini revolution in Iran, when black-covered women crowded public squares of Tehran. Some bright minds in Turkey decided to apply the same tactics, using women and female students against the state under the pretext of democracy and individual rights. In 1982, for the first time, Istanbul University authorities declared that female students covering their heads and wearing the so-called turban would not be accepted in classes. Since then, the headscarf-turban has been a continuing issue of controversy.
A milestone case was the 1999 elections. A turbaned candidate named Merve Kavakci, who was living in the U.S., won parliamentary elections. But a majority of parliamentarians refused to allow her to stay in the parliament if she insisted on wearing a turban. Kavakci went back to America, where she is still trying to behave like a Moslem Joan of Arc. Because of her, many people in Turkey believe that the turban is somehow an American conspiracy aimed at undermining Turkish power. The problem is much more complicated and deeper than it appears. Until the ‘80s, Turkey was an agricultural country with most of its population living in rural areas. Steady industrialization, however, stimulated migration from rural areas to urban centers. Now Turkey is an industrial country with 70 percent of its population living in cities — even though many were born in the countryside. Democracy has given these people the chance of being the dominant social group. Wearing the turban is one way of expressing their new power. It has became a kind of solidarity uniform of young countryside people, defying established “urban” rules instead of adapting to the metropolitan way of life.
Although defenders of the turban claim that it is an expression of Islamic faith, non-political Islamic scholars and theologians insist there is not such strict rule of head covering in Islam. In fact, it is part of Christian theology. Here are some references from Saint Paul’s First Letter to Corinthians in the Holy Bible: * “But I want you to know that the head of every man is the Christ; in turn the head of woman is the man; in turn the head of Christ is God.” (11:3) * “For if a woman does not cover herself, let her also be shorn; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered.” (11:6) * “For a man ought not to have his head covered; as he is God’s image and glory; but the woman is man’s glory.” (11:7).* “For man is not out of woman, but woman out of man.” (11:8) * “And, what is more, man was not created for the sake of the woman, but woman for the sake of man.” (11:9) * “That is why the woman ought to have a sign of authority upon her head because of angels.” (11:10) There is no such stricture to a woman covering her head in Islam’s holy book, the Holy Quran. The Quran says that believing women should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what ordinarily appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms. (24:30, 31). Unlike Christianity, there is no Church in Islam, no clergy class, no nuns. To be a Muslim, it is enough to accept that there is only one God and that Mohammed (PBUH) is His Messenger. The rest is between the believer and God. There is no authority that will decide who is a good Muslim and who is not. Since God has given intelligence to human beings, Muslims are responsible directly to God, with no one in between. That is, in general, the Turkish way of being Muslim. So covering a woman’s head with nun-like headscarves is not going back to Islamic fundamentals, but rootless imitation of Christian nuns!
Nobody should have anything to say about the way one chooses to live his or her private life. It is the same for a woman’s choice of what she wears. But when that choice becomes a political act against laws and rules, it also becomes a betrayal of the essence of Islam. In that case, it is not a matter of Islamic faith but a cover for the political aims of destroying the state structure in Turkey. The present-day political power of the AKP (Justice and Development Party) is based on the new urban social group. Putting turbans on their women’s heads is a strategy of establishing political dominance. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and President Abdullah Gul are the chief representatives, with their covered wives, of the rebellion against Ataturk’s state authority republic. This is the result of democracy. What is next? It is not easy to guess. The armed forces have always been central to maintaining the order of the Kemalist state. Until now, they haven’t shown any noticeable reaction. But how far can they be pushed? Can we say a final goodbye to Ataturk and his nation/state, or will there be an inescapable breaking point at which time they come out of the barracks?
Halit Refig, one of Turkey’s leading intellectuals, is a filmmaker/ screenwriter whose films include “Four Women in the Harem” and “Island of the Dogs.” He is also on the board of NPQ-Turkey. — EditorBy Halit Refig
ISTANBUL: The headscarf controversy is taking the place of PKK terrorism and Kurdish separatism as the most contentious issue in Turkish political life. Civil disobedience is replacing bloody terrorism, which seems to have lost its initiative since the aerial bombings of PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ Party) camps in northern Iraq. The new militants against the state order are not armed men, but girls with covered heads who refuse to obey the rules of university education because of their religious faith. But the target is the same: Turkish central state power established under the leadership of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. These rebellious girls do not cover their heads with the traditional Turkish headscarf. For this reason, it is given the distinctive name “turban.” It is a kind of uniform. Turkey didn’t have such a turban problem until the 1980s. Indeed, there was no headscarf problem in Turkey until the Khomeini revolution in Iran, when black-covered women crowded public squares of Tehran. Some bright minds in Turkey decided to apply the same tactics, using women and female students against the state under the pretext of democracy and individual rights. In 1982, for the first time, Istanbul University authorities declared that female students covering their heads and wearing the so-called turban would not be accepted in classes. Since then, the headscarf-turban has been a continuing issue of controversy.
A milestone case was the 1999 elections. A turbaned candidate named Merve Kavakci, who was living in the U.S., won parliamentary elections. But a majority of parliamentarians refused to allow her to stay in the parliament if she insisted on wearing a turban. Kavakci went back to America, where she is still trying to behave like a Moslem Joan of Arc. Because of her, many people in Turkey believe that the turban is somehow an American conspiracy aimed at undermining Turkish power. The problem is much more complicated and deeper than it appears. Until the ‘80s, Turkey was an agricultural country with most of its population living in rural areas. Steady industrialization, however, stimulated migration from rural areas to urban centers. Now Turkey is an industrial country with 70 percent of its population living in cities — even though many were born in the countryside. Democracy has given these people the chance of being the dominant social group. Wearing the turban is one way of expressing their new power. It has became a kind of solidarity uniform of young countryside people, defying established “urban” rules instead of adapting to the metropolitan way of life.
Although defenders of the turban claim that it is an expression of Islamic faith, non-political Islamic scholars and theologians insist there is not such strict rule of head covering in Islam. In fact, it is part of Christian theology. Here are some references from Saint Paul’s First Letter to Corinthians in the Holy Bible: * “But I want you to know that the head of every man is the Christ; in turn the head of woman is the man; in turn the head of Christ is God.” (11:3) * “For if a woman does not cover herself, let her also be shorn; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered.” (11:6) * “For a man ought not to have his head covered; as he is God’s image and glory; but the woman is man’s glory.” (11:7).* “For man is not out of woman, but woman out of man.” (11:8) * “And, what is more, man was not created for the sake of the woman, but woman for the sake of man.” (11:9) * “That is why the woman ought to have a sign of authority upon her head because of angels.” (11:10) There is no such stricture to a woman covering her head in Islam’s holy book, the Holy Quran. The Quran says that believing women should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what ordinarily appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms. (24:30, 31). Unlike Christianity, there is no Church in Islam, no clergy class, no nuns. To be a Muslim, it is enough to accept that there is only one God and that Mohammed (PBUH) is His Messenger. The rest is between the believer and God. There is no authority that will decide who is a good Muslim and who is not. Since God has given intelligence to human beings, Muslims are responsible directly to God, with no one in between. That is, in general, the Turkish way of being Muslim. So covering a woman’s head with nun-like headscarves is not going back to Islamic fundamentals, but rootless imitation of Christian nuns!
Nobody should have anything to say about the way one chooses to live his or her private life. It is the same for a woman’s choice of what she wears. But when that choice becomes a political act against laws and rules, it also becomes a betrayal of the essence of Islam. In that case, it is not a matter of Islamic faith but a cover for the political aims of destroying the state structure in Turkey. The present-day political power of the AKP (Justice and Development Party) is based on the new urban social group. Putting turbans on their women’s heads is a strategy of establishing political dominance. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and President Abdullah Gul are the chief representatives, with their covered wives, of the rebellion against Ataturk’s state authority republic. This is the result of democracy. What is next? It is not easy to guess. The armed forces have always been central to maintaining the order of the Kemalist state. Until now, they haven’t shown any noticeable reaction. But how far can they be pushed? Can we say a final goodbye to Ataturk and his nation/state, or will there be an inescapable breaking point at which time they come out of the barracks?
Saturday, 16 February 2008
Should Churches be allowed in Islamic Gulf States?
Qatar's first church sparks bitter debate
DOHA, Feb 16, 2008 (AFP) - A bitter debate has broken out in the tiny, oil-rich Gulf state of Qatar over construction of the Muslim country's first Christian church, set to open next month in time for Easter.
Critics have branded the concept as 'repulsive' while supporters said building places of worship for other religions is a right guaranteed by Islam.
One former minister insisted there should have been a public referendum.
'The cross should not be raised in the sky of Qatar, nor should bells toll in Doha,' wrote columnist Lahdan bin Issa al-Muhanadi in the Doha daily Al-Arab -- adding an apology in case the concept upset any readers in this country of 900,000, of whom only 200,000 are native Qataris.
But the former dean of the sharia (Islamic law) school at Qatar University, Abdul Hamid al-Ansari, disagreed, saying having 'places of worship for various religions is a fundamental human right guaranteed by Islam.'
Ansari has written several newspaper articles welcoming the Roman Catholic church in Doha, which is called St. Mary's and will be inaugurated on March 15 by Vatican envoy Cardinal Ivan Dias.
Four other Christian denominations are also planning to build churches in Qatar, whose ruling family and most of its small native population adhere to a strict rigorous doctrine of Islam known as Wahhabism.
Once St. Mary's opens, neighbour Saudi Arabia, which also practises Wahhabism, will be the only Arab nation in the Gulf that bans churches.
Gas-wealthy Qatar has opened up since current ruler and staunch US ally Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani seized control and ousted his father in a 1995 palace coup.
Qatar's leaders have even hosted Jewish rabbis and Christian clerics alongside Muslim religious scholars at annual inter-faith forums.
But Ansari sees the old influence in the current opposition. He attributes it to 'a fanatic culture resulting from religious teaching (stipulating) hatred for the other and from social norms that denied non-Muslims their rights on the basis of old political and security considerations that have become obsolete.'
St. Mary's parish priest, Father Tomasito Veneracion, a Filipino, stressed in comments to the daily Al-Raya that the church would be 'merely a place for collective prayer.' It would not have crosses outside the building or serve as a platform for proselytising.
It would finally provide a place of worship for those who up to now were forced to practise religious rituals at home, he added. And it would be open in time for the solemn Easter holyday, which this year falls on March 23.
For other Christians, construction of an Anglican church will begin in May, according to Qatar's Anglican priest Canon William Schwarz. Building has already begun on a Greek Orthodox church and another for Copts.
The Vatican website estimates about 100,000 Qatar residents are Christian. Most are Indians, Filipinos, Lebanese and Western nationals who, despite praying in private, have celebrated Christmas publicly for about a decade.
The debate meanwhile has spilled into the letters pages of Doha's dailies.
Engineer Rashed al-Subaie, in a letter to Al-Watan, agreed Christians should be allowed to practise their faith but should do so 'in line with public morals without being given licences to set up places of worship.'
Christians should 'worship their God in their homes,' not publicly, he wrote.
Lawyer and former justice minister Najib al-Nuaimi also objected to building churches in Qatar on 'legal and social' grounds.
'Qatar is a Muslim -- not secular -- state, as per its constitution. There should have been a referendum on the building of these churches in order to ensure they are socially accepted,' he told AFP.
But Ansari hit back at those citing Islamic texts to justify their rejection, notably Muhanadi who has quoted the Prophet Mohammed saying 'no two religions will come together in the Arabian peninsula.'
'This does not mean that churches should be banned in Qatar because (Islamic) religious scholars believe it applies to Hijaz -- specifically Mecca and Medina,' Islam's two holiest cities in Saudi Arabia, Ansari said.
'Let's all welcome the presence of churches in Qatar... as a demonstration of Islamic tolerance and human brotherhood,' he said.
DOHA, Feb 16, 2008 (AFP) - A bitter debate has broken out in the tiny, oil-rich Gulf state of Qatar over construction of the Muslim country's first Christian church, set to open next month in time for Easter.
Critics have branded the concept as 'repulsive' while supporters said building places of worship for other religions is a right guaranteed by Islam.
One former minister insisted there should have been a public referendum.
'The cross should not be raised in the sky of Qatar, nor should bells toll in Doha,' wrote columnist Lahdan bin Issa al-Muhanadi in the Doha daily Al-Arab -- adding an apology in case the concept upset any readers in this country of 900,000, of whom only 200,000 are native Qataris.
But the former dean of the sharia (Islamic law) school at Qatar University, Abdul Hamid al-Ansari, disagreed, saying having 'places of worship for various religions is a fundamental human right guaranteed by Islam.'
Ansari has written several newspaper articles welcoming the Roman Catholic church in Doha, which is called St. Mary's and will be inaugurated on March 15 by Vatican envoy Cardinal Ivan Dias.
Four other Christian denominations are also planning to build churches in Qatar, whose ruling family and most of its small native population adhere to a strict rigorous doctrine of Islam known as Wahhabism.
Once St. Mary's opens, neighbour Saudi Arabia, which also practises Wahhabism, will be the only Arab nation in the Gulf that bans churches.
Gas-wealthy Qatar has opened up since current ruler and staunch US ally Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani seized control and ousted his father in a 1995 palace coup.
Qatar's leaders have even hosted Jewish rabbis and Christian clerics alongside Muslim religious scholars at annual inter-faith forums.
But Ansari sees the old influence in the current opposition. He attributes it to 'a fanatic culture resulting from religious teaching (stipulating) hatred for the other and from social norms that denied non-Muslims their rights on the basis of old political and security considerations that have become obsolete.'
St. Mary's parish priest, Father Tomasito Veneracion, a Filipino, stressed in comments to the daily Al-Raya that the church would be 'merely a place for collective prayer.' It would not have crosses outside the building or serve as a platform for proselytising.
It would finally provide a place of worship for those who up to now were forced to practise religious rituals at home, he added. And it would be open in time for the solemn Easter holyday, which this year falls on March 23.
For other Christians, construction of an Anglican church will begin in May, according to Qatar's Anglican priest Canon William Schwarz. Building has already begun on a Greek Orthodox church and another for Copts.
The Vatican website estimates about 100,000 Qatar residents are Christian. Most are Indians, Filipinos, Lebanese and Western nationals who, despite praying in private, have celebrated Christmas publicly for about a decade.
The debate meanwhile has spilled into the letters pages of Doha's dailies.
Engineer Rashed al-Subaie, in a letter to Al-Watan, agreed Christians should be allowed to practise their faith but should do so 'in line with public morals without being given licences to set up places of worship.'
Christians should 'worship their God in their homes,' not publicly, he wrote.
Lawyer and former justice minister Najib al-Nuaimi also objected to building churches in Qatar on 'legal and social' grounds.
'Qatar is a Muslim -- not secular -- state, as per its constitution. There should have been a referendum on the building of these churches in order to ensure they are socially accepted,' he told AFP.
But Ansari hit back at those citing Islamic texts to justify their rejection, notably Muhanadi who has quoted the Prophet Mohammed saying 'no two religions will come together in the Arabian peninsula.'
'This does not mean that churches should be banned in Qatar because (Islamic) religious scholars believe it applies to Hijaz -- specifically Mecca and Medina,' Islam's two holiest cities in Saudi Arabia, Ansari said.
'Let's all welcome the presence of churches in Qatar... as a demonstration of Islamic tolerance and human brotherhood,' he said.
A Muslim response to the Archbishop of Canterbury's recent comments
Canterbury … How nice of you
By Ali Ahmad Al-BaghliFormer Oil Minister
THE Archbishop of Canterbury and head of Church of England, Rowan Williams, is as revered by members of his church as is the Vatican Pope by followers of the Catholic church. This brave bishop says, “no one can escape some of the Islamic teachings and people should be more open-minded towards Islam because a productive compromise can be reached if other religions deal with Islam with an open mind.” The bishop said this on BBC when he was talking about Islam and its links with the British law. His statement on Islamic teachings created a big uproar and the English newspapers and government are still talking about it. This is a normal reaction in an open-minded, democratic and free society like the British society. What we care about here is the peace campaign which the bishop undertook by asking for inclusion of a number of Islamic teachings in the British law, especially since the number of Muslims in the British society is increasing steadily.
Our religious leaders and their so-called followers, whose number is also increasing with each passing day, lack the kind of peaceful approach adopted by the bishop. Some religious men are praying to God day and night against people of other religions. They also prevent us from wishing them on their festivals. Our religious men are also against granting citizenship to people of other religions and some of them have even prevented us from doing good things like exchanging red roses or chocolates on Valentine’s Day. We hope these religious men go back to living in tents and riding camels in deserts instead of bothering about people of other religions. Yes, we need tens of such bishops to live among us. We need men like Abdullrahman Al-Kawakibi, Mohammad Abduh, Jamal Al-Deen Al-Afghani and Mahmoud Al-Aqqad to light the world for us.
albaghlilaw@hotmail.com
By Ali Ahmad Al-BaghliFormer Oil Minister
THE Archbishop of Canterbury and head of Church of England, Rowan Williams, is as revered by members of his church as is the Vatican Pope by followers of the Catholic church. This brave bishop says, “no one can escape some of the Islamic teachings and people should be more open-minded towards Islam because a productive compromise can be reached if other religions deal with Islam with an open mind.” The bishop said this on BBC when he was talking about Islam and its links with the British law. His statement on Islamic teachings created a big uproar and the English newspapers and government are still talking about it. This is a normal reaction in an open-minded, democratic and free society like the British society. What we care about here is the peace campaign which the bishop undertook by asking for inclusion of a number of Islamic teachings in the British law, especially since the number of Muslims in the British society is increasing steadily.
Our religious leaders and their so-called followers, whose number is also increasing with each passing day, lack the kind of peaceful approach adopted by the bishop. Some religious men are praying to God day and night against people of other religions. They also prevent us from wishing them on their festivals. Our religious men are also against granting citizenship to people of other religions and some of them have even prevented us from doing good things like exchanging red roses or chocolates on Valentine’s Day. We hope these religious men go back to living in tents and riding camels in deserts instead of bothering about people of other religions. Yes, we need tens of such bishops to live among us. We need men like Abdullrahman Al-Kawakibi, Mohammad Abduh, Jamal Al-Deen Al-Afghani and Mahmoud Al-Aqqad to light the world for us.
albaghlilaw@hotmail.com
Thursday, 14 February 2008
Now is the Time
With the Danish cartoon row erupting, Islamophobic reactions erupting in the media in the UK to the Archbishop of Canterbury's comments about shari'a law and ongoing confrontation between Christian and Muslim communities, there is a great need for members of both these latter communities to reach out and build a bridge.
Here in Kuwait we are blessed to be living in a community which celebrates constitutional religious freedom. The police take seriously any perceived crimes of religious intolerance. Yet there is still a gap between Christians and Muslims. There are too few initiatives to build bridges.
There is of course the sterling work of AWARE and the Perceptions Centre which seeks to interpret and explain Islam and Islamic culture to Westerners. There is also a Gulf Council for promoting tolerance between the different religious communities.
St Paul's Anglican Church in Kuwait is keen to explore our part is helping to bridge the gap.
The intention of this forum is to invite both Muslim and Christian readers to interact with one another on line in order to facilitate questions of the day which concern us both.
The purpose of this site is not for proselytization (for this is illegal in Kuwait), but is rather a means of Muslims meeting Christians and vice versa for honest dialogue. There are some strict guidelines and these are
1) That the dialogue is respectful. We do not welcome insults or disparaging remarks about one another's faith. We can of course choose to disagree and this is essential for honest dialogue.
2) That we can explore issues by posting questions and inviting reposnses to those questions.
As this is the first posting , we will keep it short.
Blessings
Here in Kuwait we are blessed to be living in a community which celebrates constitutional religious freedom. The police take seriously any perceived crimes of religious intolerance. Yet there is still a gap between Christians and Muslims. There are too few initiatives to build bridges.
There is of course the sterling work of AWARE and the Perceptions Centre which seeks to interpret and explain Islam and Islamic culture to Westerners. There is also a Gulf Council for promoting tolerance between the different religious communities.
St Paul's Anglican Church in Kuwait is keen to explore our part is helping to bridge the gap.
The intention of this forum is to invite both Muslim and Christian readers to interact with one another on line in order to facilitate questions of the day which concern us both.
The purpose of this site is not for proselytization (for this is illegal in Kuwait), but is rather a means of Muslims meeting Christians and vice versa for honest dialogue. There are some strict guidelines and these are
1) That the dialogue is respectful. We do not welcome insults or disparaging remarks about one another's faith. We can of course choose to disagree and this is essential for honest dialogue.
2) That we can explore issues by posting questions and inviting reposnses to those questions.
As this is the first posting , we will keep it short.
Blessings
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
